If the world health organization doesn’t get their act together soon, it could be a global problem before we know it.

There’s one thing that I personally know: so far it hasn’t come to my country, or at least there is no known infected person yet.

Maybe the government is hiding something here, but who knows?

Thanks, @Mimishu1995.

MY government, the US, has imported some cases, intentionally, and beat the virus. I hope “we” (the US) have a cure that we’re covering, until it’s developed.

I know that American Dr. Kent Bradley contracted the virus while in Liberia. He was treated with experimental drug zMapp. 2 months later he is still alive. He was released from hospital on August 21st. And as of September 3rd he is still very weak and recovering in Atlanta.

‘This is like all you need to know https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao0dqJvH4a0

My knowledge is reasonably encyclopedic actually. What would you like to know?

@osoraro, let’s say hypothetically you survive the virus after 4 weeks and it’s gone from your system entirely. Can the body fully recover the damage done or is it a permanent damage kind of disease. Also, what would be damaged?

What @ninjacolin asked. I have seen an interview or two ith the man that survived, but thre was. Mention f what the LNG term problems might be.

I personally know that I’m moderately concerned about it. I’m very sympathetic to anyone in its wake right now.

Sorry about that post, the phone rang so I didn’t check before posting.

@ninjacolin Well, the virus itself would be gone, but you would have probably undergone a prolonged hospital course and probable ICU stay. You may have weakness, end organ damage, and brain dysfunction. In terms of what would be damaged, it really depends from person to person.

I know it’s a virus. That’s all.
But I would like to know more.

@dxs Here you go
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/

@osoraro gracias! thanks!

I knew that too, @ninjacolin, from NPR.

Cool video, @pleiades.

Why do you know so much, @osoraro? Do you live in an Ebola area?

They said that there could be over a million cases, by, I believe, the new year @ARE_you_kidding_me. Damned scarey stuff.

I think the statistic I heard was over 2,600 cases so far, the majority within the past 4 months, @dxs.

It’s constantly on NPR news.

What Obama says is true.

Without fail, every single time.

@ibstubro I run an intensive care unit and am in charge of implementing an Ebola management plan for my hospital.

In the US, @osoraro?

Welcome! We can use all the expertise we can get.

@ibstubro Yes. You don’t need to welcome me, though, but thanks. I’ve been around for years, just under a different username, Rarebear.

Oh, I remember Rarebear.

I personally know very little about ebola specifically; but knowing how viruses can spread and mutate, the possibilities can be frightening.

Regarding the recovery, Dr. Rick Sacra was just released from the hospital and spoke of the recovery process.

I was wondering the other day whether those who do manage to survive the disease are then relatively immune to it – as with chicken pox and other viruses that we can only get once. In that case, couldn’t survivors, once they regain their strength, then be trained to treat those who have contracted the illness, @osoraro?

There is not enough evidence to prove immunity or not with Ebola survivors, @hearkat. There was a great piece on NPR about training survivors to work with the infected, but they are currently requiring them to wear the same protection as everyone else.

It was a scarey interview…they talked about how sweaty the volunteer was, removing the PPE. Knowing that sweat is a primary means of infection.

Listening to it now, @ibstubro. I didn’t listen to the radio yesterday, so I missed it. Thanks!

:) @hearkat

@hearkat Likely, yes. http://www.livescience.com/47511-are-ebola-survivors-immune.html

There are topics I tire of hearing about constantly @hearkat (like Ferguson Missouri, because I’m getting NPR from St. Louis), but I’m riveted by the Ebola epidemic. I keep hoping to hear a breakthrough or at least a turning of the tide.

The health minister of Liberia quarantined herself because a co-worker contracted Ebola. Very smart move, and a great way of advertising consistent compliance.

Well, that’s the thing. You don’t need to quarantine yourself if you come in casual contact with someone with Ebola. It takes close bodily contact or body fluids. You can’t catch it by being in the same room with someone.

So I’m not sure the health minister needed to quarantine herself. But it does model compliance, and that’s good.

There was one American doctor that contracted the disease, @osoraro without having known contact with an infected person. He wasn’t even treating Ebola patients, more of a GP. Over 200 health care workers dead?

It seems as though everyone needs to err on the side of caution, and that’s exactly what the health minister practiced.

@ibstubro No question you have to air in the side of caution. I entirely agree. I’m just saying that it’s not like the flu, that you can catch just by being in the same room. You need contact with bodily fluid.

But body fluids can be aerosolized, or airborne, through sneezing and presumably resting your arm in the perspiration of an infected person would be sufficient.

I believe you can become infected by being in the same room as an infected person. Why else are the caregivers suited up to tightly?

I think there is a big distinction between the precautions you take for droplet and airborne contamination.

What do you mean, @ARE_you_kidding_me?

If I’m thinking of this correctly transmission of ebola is closer to hepatitis than the flu. It’s not really airborne. Droplet is not the correct word, I should have said fluid contact.

This was discussed earlier @ARE_you_kidding_me, and the point was made that the virus can be transmitted through the air if it is aerosolized, as by a sneeze. Whether my use of “airborne” in that context may indeed be incorrect.

Yes, indeed, I stand corrected by myself:

When you are referencing people nearby each other and sneezing, etc, that is what they term as aerosolized rather than airborne.

Airborne refers to transmission over longer distances and periods of time, thus being truly borne by the air rather than carried by droplets suspended in air.

It may sound like semantics but it really is the distinction which they make. says@seekingwolf.

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/transmission/

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/pdf/infographic.pdf

What about eating food that someone with the illness prepared?

Remember, “You can’t get Ebola through food”, @SQUEEKY2. Only through “Touching infected animals, their blood or other body fluids, or their meat.”
The CDC tells me so.

The virus hangs around on surfaces. So if the surface is infected and the food isn’t cooked right then you may be at risk. Especially if you’re eating an infected bat.

lol, that is curious. Does it mean that saliva and stomach acid put up a pretty good defense?

The CDC unequivocally states, “You can’t get Ebola through food.”

Washington Post: “Scientists believe the virus spread to humans who had contact with the blood or bodily fluids of infected animals, including bats, monkeys, chimpanzees, gorillas, forest antelope and porcupines.” A number of which could be, or come into contact with, food. So it’s certainly possible you could become infected during food preparation.

The CDC also states unequivocally: “You can’t get Ebola through air.”

They obviously haven’t met “Mr. Spitty”, the old man that we did business with recently that had no ‘personal space’, had a speech impediment and sprayed saliva with every word. I remember him and my auction partner standing in a sunbeam in the garage, little silver orbs battering my partner. Amazing feat of self control, as I couldn’t have allowed it.

@ibstubro Sort of. It is correct in that it is not aerosol transmission, but it is transmissible through contaminated body surfaces and sweat. So if somoene spits on the food, sweats on the food, pisses on the food, and you eat the food, then you are at risk.

“Ebola is not spread through the air or by water, or in general, food. However, in Africa, Ebola may be spread as a result of handling bushmeat (wild animals hunted for food) and contact with infected bats.”

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/transmission/

What was the experimental drug given in the US, and why is supply so short?

Why, when serum was tried during earlier outbreaks, was it not a controlled study? What was the value of throwing everything at the virus, and having no idea what worked?

@ibstubro Here is the information
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/qa-experimental-treatments.html

Supply is short because it’s not been trialed in humans.

I have no idea as to your second question.

I’ve read the ZMapp story, @osoraro. It was reported that some patients that were brought back to the US for treatment were given an experimental treatment. I now see no reference to that.

I also wonder why they aren’t trying serum again. Or admitting that they are. 3,000 dead leaves 3,000 survivors if the death rate is 50%.

I think the powers that be are much more afraid than they are letting on, and that they are pretty tightly controlling the information decimated to the public. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, and I’m not saying that I disagree with what they seem to be doing. I’m saying that, taken objectively, the stories aren’t adding up.

I came up with a conspiracy theory yesterday: What if the big nations just really don’t want to stop using carbon fuels? So, instead of changing their behavior, they figure they could just half the user base with ebola and stay on top?

I haven’t heard any real conspiracy theories but I’d totally make a big budget film on that one.

well, what I do know is there is a company in California that apparently has the cure but will only distribute it at a very high cost and to the extremely wealthy, thats only IF they get infected.

Source that, @one4u_1forme?