Ebola

[shirley1929]

Originally Posted by Outlaw 1963

If healthcare workers want to go over to Africa and aid the victims, then they need to keep their asses there until a vaccine/cure is developed.

I kinda get what you're thinking, but the reality is people are going to get through borders and on flights no matter how much "locking down" we do of the borders. Plus, it's not cool to tell people "don't go helping the people who need it because you won't be welcome back". The rest of the world mostly thinks we're jerks (my opinion, of course) so why perpetuate that stereotype? If there aren't planes coming this way (due to locked down borders) then our humanitarian efforts can't get back that direction. Simple airline economics.

My understanding is that SARS (a few years ago) killed more people and was FAR more contagious than Ebola. Did we lock down our borders (or even discuss it?) to Asian countries then? Of course not. We shouldn't now either.

Go get a flu shot - that's probably your biggest viral threat right now & there IS a vaccine for that one!

IU Hoosier...thanks so much for all the good info! I find it very interesting reading. You too, CheerfulGreek.

[LAblondeGPhi]

Originally Posted by Outlaw 1963

I'm just trippin at why they can't just come up with a vaccine like they do for other illnesses.

Ditto what IUHoosierGirl and CheerfulGreek said - vaccines aren't just an easy thing to whip up.

It takes big bucks and resources to develop vaccines. Where was the real incentive to spend that kind of money for a disease that, while terrifying, had infected fewer than 2,500 people globally over the almost 40 years since it first popped up? (prior to the 2013-14 outbreaks, of course)(source)

Even if you do have the money and the will, it can take years to develop treatments. It depends on the nature of the virus and how wily it is.

Originally Posted by shirley1929

My understanding is that SARS (a few years ago) killed more people and was FAR more contagious than Ebola. Did we lock down our borders (or even discuss it?) to Asian countries then? Of course not. We shouldn't now either.

I looked up the SARS outbreak the other day, because my memory was that SARS was much less scary than Ebola. The outbreak of 2002-03 killed fewer than 800 people, and had a fatality rate a little under 10% (source). The current Ebola outbreak has killed more than 4,500 people, and the fatality rate is likely between 50-70% (source).

I don't know about how contagious one is versus the other, but based on this thread, I suspect you're right that SARS is more contagious.

If we really want to talk about contagious, can we talk about how freaking contagious MEASLES is? There was a kid in the DC area who got measles last year, and public health officials were reporting all the locations this kid had been to while contagious but asymptomatic. Non-immune folks have up to a 90% chance of contracting it by getting near a contagious person.

[IUHoosiergirl88]

Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi

If we really want to talk about contagious, can we talk about how freaking contagious MEASLES is? There was a kid in the DC area who got measles last year, and public health officials were reporting all the locations this kid had been to while contagious but asymptomatic. Non-immune folks have up to a 90% chance of contracting it by getting near a contagious person.

Measles actually has a high R-naught value (aka the average number of people a sick person gets sick in an average uninfected population). The average measles patient infects 12-18 people, if it weren't for vaccines!

Just for comparison:
Measles: 12-18
Pertussis: 12-17
Diptheria: 6-7
Smallpox: 5-7
Polio: 5-7
Rubella: 5-7
Mumps: 4-7
HIV/AIDS: 2-5
SARS: 2-5
Influenza (1918 Spanish flu pandemic): 2-3
Ebola: 1-2

[shirley1929]

Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi

I looked up the SARS outbreak the other day, because my memory was that SARS was much less scary than Ebola. The outbreak of 2002-03 killed fewer than 800 people, and had a fatality rate a little under 10% (source). The current Ebola outbreak has killed more than 4,500 people, and the fatality rate is likely between 50-70% (source).

I don't know about how contagious one is versus the other, but based on this thread, I suspect you're right that SARS is more contagious.

If we really want to talk about contagious, can we talk about how freaking contagious MEASLES is? There was a kid in the DC area who got measles last year, and public health officials were reporting all the locations this kid had been to while contagious but asymptomatic. Non-immune folks have up to a 90% chance of contracting it by getting near a contagious person.

Ok, I know better than to go quoting crap I read without being able to find the source, so consider me wrong on the mortality/catchability of SARS! It was one of those things I read when people were discussing locking down borders, and the concept made sense to me (we didn't do it then, why now?) but of course I don't know how reputable my source was.

And ugh...yes...on measles. I remember when there was a big outbreak back in the late 80's. Was a big deal. Isn't the big thing about measles is that you're contagious when you don't know you have it? Once you have the symptoms, you're done being contagious? Like chicken pox? Ugh, ugh ugh.

[IUHoosiergirl88]

Originally Posted by Outlaw 1963

This is wild as hell. I knew about ticks spreading that one disease called Lyme disease. Some folks died from it, too. But I didn't know fleas and lice spread shit LOL. It seems like it would be a hygiene problem. I say that because lice are attracted to people who don't wash up. Do y'all remember that bed bug scare a few years back? I'm in Ohio and it was on the news at the time that there was a bed bug problem in some areas.

So basically the insects that feed off of the animals, give it to the animals, which in turn infect people. Then it would make sense to me to eliminate the main cause of it. The start of it.

I hate those other countries that don't like us. We have folks in this country who are unemployed, who don't have healthcare and can't afford to go seek medical treatment, but yet we send healthcare workers to other third world countries who don't like us, to take care of their people for free. That right there is some bullshit. Let them fend for themselves. They don't like us anyway.

I don't get the flu shot because the last time I did, I got sick as hell. I know that's what it's supposed to do, but it's not worth it to me. I'll just take vitamin c.

I feel you on IUHoosier and Cheerful's knowledge. I can talk about this all day.

1. It's not really a hygiene problem--do you know what spread the bubonic plague back in the day? Yup, fleas. People come in contact with fleas often due to pets. Bedbugs are still a problem in many major cities b/c they're so dang hard to get rid of. Lice actually are attracted to clean heads, vice dirty ones.

2. Do you know how many insect species live in this world? Around one million. And those are the only ones that have been discovered. Some estimate there may be as many as 30 million different species. Insects also play a crucial role in life as we know it, so getting rid of them isn't going to happen.

3. You "hate those other countries that don't like us"...have you ever been overseas (and Mexico/Canada doesn't count)? Most countries don't hate us. Even those that have unfriendly governments usually have American-friendly citizens. Putting that aside, Liberia and the USA are on good terms--we actually founded that country (their capital is named Monrovia after James Monroe). We went through a 5 year period from 1997-2003 where relations were a little rocky due to the election of Charles Taylor, but since he resigned in 2003, things have been pretty peachy. We actually deployed marines there to help stabilize the country during the Bush administration. Similar things can be said about Sierra Leone, and most of the other affected countries. They don't not like us.

Truth be told, even in the most hardcore, hardline anti-American governed countries, most of the citizens don't hate us.

[Phrozen Sands]

Originally Posted by IUHoosiergirl88

1. It's not really a hygiene problem--do you know what spread the bubonic plague back in the day? Yup, fleas. People come in contact with fleas often due to pets. Bedbugs are still a problem in many major cities b/c they're so dang hard to get rid of. Lice actually are attracted to clean heads, vice dirty ones.


3. You "hate those other countries that don't like us"...have you ever been overseas (and Mexico/Canada doesn't count)? Most countries don't hate us. Even those that have unfriendly governments usually have American-friendly citizens. Putting that aside, Liberia and the USA are on good terms--we actually founded that country (their capital is named Monrovia after James Monroe). We went through a 5 year period from 1997-2003 where relations were a little rocky due to the election of Charles Taylor, but since he resigned in 2003, things have been pretty peachy. We actually deployed marines there to help stabilize the country during the Bush administration. Similar things can be said about Sierra Leone, and most of the other affected countries. They don't not like us.

Truth be told, even in the most hardcore, hardline anti-American governed countries, most of the citizens don't hate us.

I remember watching something on the history channel about the Bubonic Plague. I just remember it being spread by rats, and also, back then, people didn't practice the best hygiene measures. The thing that gets me, and maybe you or CG can answer this question, but what happened to the Bubonic Plague? Why aren't people affected by it today? A lot of the old diseases have seemed to "disappear", but the newer diseases are still doing damage. No, not like the Bubonic Plague, but still keeping numbers.

I actually agree with Iota guy in a sense. I find it to be aggravating giving other people in other countries "free healthcare", but people in this country don't receive it. Take care of your own lawn before you help someone else maintain theirs.

[ASTalumna06]

Nigeria is now Ebola-free:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebo...-cases-n229536

BUJA - The World Health Organization declared Nigeria Ebola free on Monday after a 42 day period with no new cases, a success story with lessons for countries still struggling to contain the deadly virus. "Nigeria is now free of Ebola," WHO representative Rui Gama Vaz told a news conference in the capital Abuja, prompting a round of applause from other officials. "This is a spectacular success story ... But we must be clear that we have only won a battle, the war will only end when West Africa is also declared free of Ebola."

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by Outlaw 1963

This is wild as hell. I knew about ticks spreading that one disease called Lyme disease. Some folks died from it, too. But I didn't know fleas and lice spread shit LOL. It seems like it would be a hygiene problem. I say that because lice are attracted to people who don't wash up. Do y'all remember that bed bug scare a few years back? I'm in Ohio and it was on the news at the time that there was a bed bug problem in some areas.

So basically the insects that feed off of the animals, give it to the animals, which in turn infect people. Then it would make sense to me to eliminate the main cause of it. The start of it.

Well, the diseases that are often carried by insects such as mosquitos/other external parasites, and flies or by animals such as rats and mice, in my experience, we've always referred to this as vectors. Sometimes multiple vectors are involved, such as (as mentioned above) in the spread of the Bubonic Plague by fleas carried by rats or typhus fever by ticks carried by rodents. I wouldn't say "eliminate", but controlling vectors usually limits the spread of a disease far more effectively than treating infected humans. In my experience as a vet, with my patients, insects and their relatives, the ticks and mites, are the most common vectors. Fleas also carry/transmit tapeworms.

However, other animals may act as vectors, as in the spread of rabies by bats and squirrels, or of West Nile virus by migrating birds. Plague and typhus normally rely on fleas and ticks to distribute them, although, under some circumstances, they can spread from person to person. Other diseases are obliged to spend part of their life cycles in a second host.

With the "hygiene" part of your post, you are partly correct. Hygiene/cleanliness does play a part, because infectious agents can also be taken in with food or drink. Poor hygiene may result in food or drinking water being contaminated with human and/or animal waste. Typically, such infections affect the gastrointestinal tract and include the many types of protozoa, bacteria and viruses that number diarrhea among their symptoms. I see it quite often with some of my patients that are outdoor pets. Parasites.

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands

The thing that gets me, and maybe you or CG can answer this question, but what happened to the Bubonic Plague? Why aren't people affected by it today? A lot of the old diseases have seemed to "disappear", but the newer diseases are still doing damage. No, not like the Bubonic Plague, but still keeping numbers.

Well, over the long-term, novel diseases may adapt to humans or may go extinct. Adaption does not imply that the disease becomes mild -- merely that it gains the ability to survive and multiply in humans. The level of virulence acquired depends on the mode of transmission and how plentiful, crowded (and as said above), unhygienic the human hosts are.

[LAblondeGPhi]

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands

I remember watching something on the history channel about the Bubonic Plague. I just remember it being spread by rats, and also, back then, people didn't practice the best hygiene measures. The thing that gets me, and maybe you or CG can answer this question, but what happened to the Bubonic Plague? Why aren't people affected by it today? A lot of the old diseases have seemed to "disappear", but the newer diseases are still doing damage. No, not like the Bubonic Plague, but still keeping numbers.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Well, over the long-term, novel diseases may adapt to humans or may go extinct. Adaption does not imply that the disease becomes mild -- merely that it gains the ability to survive and multiply in humans. The level of virulence acquired depends on the mode of transmission and how plentiful, crowded (and as said above), unhygienic the human hosts are.

I always thought that natural selection and population resistance had something to do with it, in addition to basic hygiene and city planning. Several major rounds of plague destroyed pretty large portions of the population in some cases. In the middle ages, a major bout wiped out more than a third of the European population. Isn't that classic Darwinism?

Also, it's a bacterial infection, so several antibiotics are effective treatment against it, no?

[ComradesTrue]

Family says that Amber Vinson is free of ebola.

Wonderful news if this is the case. Hopefully she can be reunited with her family/friends in either Dallas or Ohio soon.

[HQWest]

Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi

I always thought that natural selection and population resistance had something to do with it, in addition to basic hygiene and city planning. Several major rounds of plague destroyed pretty large portions of the population in some cases. In the middle ages, a major bout wiped out more than a third of the European population. Isn't that classic Darwinism?

Also, it's a bacterial infection, so several antibiotics are effective treatment against it, no?

Its still around. It turns up from time to time in Colorado New Mexico or Arizona. I think usually in children that have been bitten by mice or rats, but it can be treated with antibiotics and so they may end up in the hospital but treated okay.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi

I always thought that natural selection and population resistance had something to do with it, in addition to basic hygiene and city planning. Several major rounds of plague destroyed pretty large portions of the population in some cases. In the middle ages, a major bout wiped out more than a third of the European population. Isn't that classic Darwinism?

Also, it's a bacterial infection, so several antibiotics are effective treatment against it, no?

Well, I don't know much about the history of diseases/viruses as far as how many civilizations were wiped out because of it. However, I do know that under some circumstances, diseases change little in their virulence or even get worse. Moreover, some, like bubonic plague, appear to oscillate in virulence.

Yep. It's caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis, which infects many animals, especially rodents. From these it can be transmitted to humans (and their cats and dogs) by fleas.