If someone thinks they might have ebola and is trying to get into the U.S. it's because they want medical treatment, not because they have aspirations of being a plague zombie.
It behooves us to simply treat the ones who come here rather than forcing them into hiding and plague-zombiedom.
I think we need to accept that people are going to want to come to the United States if they have, or think they have, Ebola. I believe (someone feel free to correct me on the stats) that you have a 20% better chance of surviving if you're in a First World health care environment as opposed to a Third World, overstaffed environment. 50% mortality vs. 70% is a big difference. Also, people in a Third World environment may believe that there is a much better than a 20% improvement if they make it to the United States.
The most obvious solution would be to improve the healthcare and sanitation of the Third World, but it is a bit late for that. The systemic changes necessary would require years, and a purge of the corruption.
Closing the borders would result in massive economic drawbacks worldwide, which in turn would severally reduce the amount of resources nations have available for anti-Ebola efforts. Think about how many products you buy that are made in other countries. We're talking a potential worldwide Depression here. And even then, people with nothing to lose would find a way to cross a border, or die trying. Closing the borders would only make sense if we were talking about "The Stand" level of epidemic.
As counter-productive as it may sound, the best way to handle this may be to offer some kind of amnesty / quick-access to anyone at risk for Ebola who enters the U.S. Get them off the streets and into isolation with experienced and prepared medical personnel as quickly as possible, and don't scare them away from seeking treatment. It may even be desirable to import Ebola cases, so that people use that means to seek treatment. Also, it would enable U.S. personnel to get experience with the disease and processes before it potentially becomes epidemic in the U.S.
I think at this point we need to let the military take over any and all Ebola cases in the US. USAMRIID are extremely highly trained for dealing with deadly viruses like Ebola, and tend to not mess around like the CDC and regular hospitals have been. They'd have put EVERYONE that even had a 1% chance of infection into strict isolation and quarantine. The only way to deal with Ebola is to let it burn out in 100% containment
USAMRIID are good, but they only have ~750 staff members according to a cursory Google search while CDC has 15,000. I'd bet a good portion of those staff members aren't equipped / trained to go out and fill the role of the CDC. They don't have the same partnerships / relationships the CDC does and - quite simply - while the CDC has fucked up some, we aren't at the point where it's clear the CDC can't handle this on their own without taking drastic measures. A few problems needing fixing, but they should do a good job of not making the same mistakes over and over.
I am curious how posse comitatus would apply to USAMRIID. I assume they would be attached to a civilian agency - the CDC almost certainly - and operate in concert with them. Since USAMRIID already works pretty intimately with the CDC and is probably waist deep in this outbreak already, I'm not sure what would be done differently aside from making the crazies yell about military takeover get your guns OBAMA.
Those numbers are misleading. On the one hand you have the CDC who has their own receptionist group, accounting, hotelling, mailroom, janitors, motorpool, ect. All of those people count into the number of people working at the CDC.
USAMRIID? Finance, janitorial staff, motorpool, network and IT is all handled by the USAMRMC staff already on base leaving the 800 or so people working at the USAMRIID as just the people who are designated as researchers, doctors, and support for biological research and defense.
People killed by malaria this year, almost all in Africa = ~625,000
People killed by ebola this year, almost all in Africa = 4500
Flu deaths each year in the US alone - ~20,000-25,000
ed
TB deaths (2012) - 1.3 million, 500 in the US
Heck, more people died of malaria in the US (5) last year than have died of Ebola here. We should be much more concerned about Malaria and Yellow Fever becoming more widespread in the US (re-emerging) than Ebola.
I saw an article that made a (good) case that more people will die indirectly from ebola than will die of ebola.
People with easily treated disease who aren't treated due to lack of resources, diminished aid (both due to logistics and reallocation to ebola efforts), etc.
I saw an article that made a (good) case that more people will die indirectly from ebola than will die of ebola.
People with easily treated disease who aren't treated due to lack of resources, diminished aid (both due to logistics and reallocation to ebola efforts), etc.
I find that totally believable.
Just the death toll on healthcare workers in the affected areas alone guarantees further significant loss of life from non-ebola causes.
I saw an article that made a (good) case that more people will die indirectly from ebola than will die of ebola.
People with easily treated disease who aren't treated due to lack of resources, diminished aid (both due to logistics and reallocation to ebola efforts), etc.
I find that totally believable.
Just the death toll on healthcare workers in the affected areas alone guarantees further significant loss of life from non-ebola causes.
Or the health care workers not available to care for non-ebola patients because they're in isolation due to questionable contact with a known or suspected ebola patient.
0
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
I saw an article that made a (good) case that more people will die indirectly from ebola than will die of ebola.
People with easily treated disease who aren't treated due to lack of resources, diminished aid (both due to logistics and reallocation to ebola efforts), etc.
I find that totally believable.
There are many reports that crops are not being harvested in Liberia and Sierra Leone and are just being left to rot in the fields. Prices for food have been doubling and tripling from lack of harvests and surrounding borders being closed.
+2
Options
Zavianuniversal peace sounds better than forever warRegistered Userregular
If someone thinks they might have ebola and is trying to get into the U.S. it's because they want medical treatment, not because they have aspirations of being a plague zombie.
It behooves us to simply treat the ones who come here rather than forcing them into hiding and plague-zombiedom.
If someone thinks they might have ebola and is trying to get into the U.S. it's because they want medical treatment, not because they have aspirations of being a plague zombie.
It behooves us to simply treat the ones who come here rather than forcing them into hiding and plague-zombiedom.
There's a reason they wanted to press charges on Duncan before he died, he put a lot of people at risk of DEATH. I am actually 100% in favor of helping as many people as possible, but the second someone with the Ebola virus in them gets on a plane they are putting many innocent people at risk of DEATH. There is not enough data to know what is going on, remember until recently they were saying it took 7 days to develop symptoms, now it's 21 days. It is mutating so fast because of all the human to human transmissions that it is a huge concern. Yes, more people die of the flu than ebola, but in the past few weeks Ebola has infected more people than it has in recorded history. This is a major and very deadly virus that is much more of a danger than the flu, and that danger is only increasing. They need to have 100% containment to get rid of it. It replaces 10% of your bodily fluids to pure virus, making it highly contagious. Flu doesn't do that.
If someone thinks they might have ebola and is trying to get into the U.S. it's because they want medical treatment, not because they have aspirations of being a plague zombie.
It behooves us to simply treat the ones who come here rather than forcing them into hiding and plague-zombiedom.
There's a reason they wanted to press charges on Duncan before he died, he put a lot of people at risk of DEATH. I am actually 100% in favor of helping as many people as possible, but the second someone with the Ebola virus in them gets on a plane they are putting many innocent people at risk of DEATH. There is not enough data to know what is going on, remember until recently they were saying it took 7 days to develop symptoms, now it's 21 days. It is mutating so fast because of all the human to human transmissions that it is a huge concern. Yes, more people die of the flu than ebola, but in the past few weeks Ebola has infected more people than it has in recorded history. This is a major and very deadly virus that is much more of a danger than the flu, and that danger is only increasing. They need to have 100% containment to get rid of it. It replaces 10% of your bodily fluids to pure virus, making it highly contagious. Flu doesn't do that.
Viruses don't mutate like in the movies. It is not mutating. It is not more virulent. Calm down.
not fear-mongering, I don't watch fox or vote republican, just stating facts like they don't know enough about the virus, but what they do know is that it is extremely dangerous and much more contagious than flu which can largely be controlled through vaccinations/medicine that isn't available for ebola. it isn't airborne, but it doesn't need to be to be very contagious
"Yes, the virus is mutating - a recent paper in Science shows that more than 300 mutations have occurred. But what is now a virus that latches onto receptors outside endothelial cells lining the circulatory system won’t change into one that can attach to the alveolar cells of the lungs. That’s a genetic leap in the realm of science fiction."
"Ebola is an RNA virus, which means it mutates quickly. So you may not get infected with the exact same strain, but you might get infected with a new strain."
Viruses don't mutate like in the movies. It is not mutating. It is not more virulent. Calm down.
The bubonic > pneumonic plauge transition, and cholera's rapid adaption to environment were almost movie bad. Though were are talking about decades long epidemics.
But Ebola is ridiculously stable and has shown basically zero mutation. All of it that we've bothered to look at is the same.
not fear-mongering, I don't watch fox or vote republican, just stating facts like they don't know enough about the virus, but what they do know is that it is extremely dangerous and much more contagious than flu. it isn't airborne, but it doesn't need to be to be very contagious
Did you even read these?
But just as worrisome as the virus's geographic spread is its journey across the evolutionary landscape. Is it mutating in ways that could make it more dangerous to humans? Is there any chance that it might become transmissible through the air, like the flu, the SARS virus, or a common cold?
Although Ebola becoming airborne is the ultimate disease nightmare, that seems to be almost vanishingly improbable, for reasons well put in a recent article in the Washington Post by Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations. What is now a fluid-borne virus attaching itself to cells lining the circulatory system can't easily change into one that targets the tiny air sacs in the lungs.
"That's a genetic leap in the realm of science fiction," Garrett wrote.
Researchers have identified more than 300 new viral mutations in the latest strain of Ebola, according to research published in the journal Science last month. They are rushing to investigate if this strain of the disease produces higher virus levels -- which could increase its infectiousness.
So far, there is no scientific data to indicate that. The risk, though, is that the longer the epidemic continues, the greater the chance that the virus could change in a way that makes it more transmissible between humans, making it harder to stop, said Charles Chiu, an infectious disease physician who studies Ebola at the University of California at San Francisco.
WASHINGTON — Medical experts say they still don’t know why two nurses treating an Ebola victim in Texas contracted the disease, but they say they don’t believe the virus has mutated in such a way that it can be transmitted through the air.
Dr. Tom Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told a congressional subcommittee Thursday that while the CDC is “absolutely looking for other mutations” in the Ebola virus, it hasn’t found any.
“We don’t think it is transmitting in a different way” other than through bodily fluids, he said.
Edit: Didn't catch your edit about being airborne. Standing by the fact that any significant mutation to the strain as a whole would require a far longer timespan than being bandied about, though.
not fear-mongering, I don't watch fox or vote republican, just stating facts like they don't know enough about the virus, but what they do know is that it is extremely dangerous and much more contagious than flu. it isn't airborne, but it doesn't need to be to be very contagious
"Yes, the virus is mutating - a recent paper in Science shows that more than 300 mutations have occurred. But what is now a virus that latches onto receptors outside endothelial cells lining the circulatory system won’t change into one that can attach to the alveolar cells of the lungs. That’s a genetic leap in the realm of science fiction."
They need to be saying "The virus has mutated."
Viruses are very sloppy in the conservation of their own genetic material and make frequent mistakes. The majority of mutations in a virus are silent (do nothing, change nothing). Mutations that cause a gain of function or loss of function are the mutations that are significant and need to be worried about. The news has taken the word "mutation", i.e. the variance in genetic information, to mean "change and increase in virulence and pathogenicity". That is simply not true.
For example, as I typed this, several cells in your body accumulated genetic mutations. Did your cells turn into something else? Nope.
Viruses don't mutate like in the movies. It is not mutating. It is not more virulent. Calm down.
The bubonic > pneumonic plauge transition, and cholera's rapid adaption to environment were almost movie bad. Though were are talking about decades long epidemics.
But Ebola is ridiculously stable and has shown basically zero mutation. All of it that we've bothered to look at is the same.
Given our very poor genetic history regarding actual outbreaks of bubonic --> pneumonic plague, I don't think we are talking about an insta-conversion.
I guess it depends on what they're thinking with...
Morning news here is basically EbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaTrafficWeatherEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaWeatherTrafficEbolaEbolaEbolaEbola. And, while they haven't yet succumbed to spreading bullshit ideas about it, this non-stop crap is only going to do the same thing.
For some context, in DFW during the summer, they would constantly report on the West Nile Virus. They'd throw up a graphic and everything about how many people died and where. Then went on to talk about where the next neighborhood was being sprayed for mosquitoes.
More people have probably died from WNV in the last month here than Ebola. And you can get it by being bit by a bug. And they spent so little time talking about it. I spent this past summer working outside and donating blood to these fucking bugs and I'm more concerned about the itchy welts they'd leave behind.
I guess it depends on what they're thinking with...
Morning news here is basically EbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaTrafficWeatherEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaWeatherTrafficEbolaEbolaEbolaEbola. And, while they haven't yet succumbed to spreading bullshit ideas about it, this non-stop crap is only going to do the same thing.
Sorry, could you please quote the relevant passage from that link you provided that says what you say it says? Because I don't want to really go through the pages and pages of technical medical jargon to find it myself, but if it does indeed say that I would like to know.
Viruses don't mutate like in the movies. It is not mutating. It is not more virulent. Calm down.
The bubonic > pneumonic plauge transition, and cholera's rapid adaption to environment were almost movie bad. Though were are talking about decades long epidemics.
But Ebola is ridiculously stable and has shown basically zero mutation. All of it that we've bothered to look at is the same.
The transition from bubonic to pneumonic plague is not the result of mutation. Also, neither plague nor cholera are viral.
Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.
Sorry, could you please quote the relevant passage from that link you provided that says what you say it says? Because I don't want to really go through the pages and pages of technical medical jargon to find it myself, but if it does indeed say that I would like to know.
I skimmed over the entire thing and read wherever they were talking about fluids and saw no indication of what he said. I'm thinking he may have read that elsewhere and had that link placed as proof. Perhaps thinking that since it is scientific and technical that no one would really read through it to dispute it. I'm open to the guy quoting the exact part he got that from, but I highly doubt it is in there. It is an great source to see the tests done and the risks of oinfections from various fliuids (semen, breast milk, blood, saliva) and that they even came to the conclusion that it isn't able to be processed by the kidneys since it isn't found in urine and so catching it from a toilet used by an infected or recovering person would be difficult without actual blood being present. Interesting read really.
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
Stupid question, but where does Ebola "go" between outbreaks? Like when we stop this bout of it, where does the next patient zero come from? I think I read that it's possibly from bats?
Stupid question, but where does Ebola "go" between outbreaks? Like when we stop this bout of it, where does the next patient zero come from? I think I read that it's possibly from bats?
Bats and Monkeys are natural carriers in the african jungle, I believe.
Stupid question, but where does Ebola "go" between outbreaks? Like when we stop this bout of it, where does the next patient zero come from? I think I read that it's possibly from bats?
Not at all a stupid question. A very valid one that many scientists are working on as we don't know the answer! There are indications that it may be associated with bats and other bush meat but nobody has proved a transmission route conclusively.
Stupid question, but where does Ebola "go" between outbreaks? Like when we stop this bout of it, where does the next patient zero come from? I think I read that it's possibly from bats?
Bats and Monkeys are natural carriers in the african jungle, I believe.
Non-human primates can catch it but aren't thought to be part of the natural reservoir because it's as good at killing them as us. The natural animal reservoir will probably either be asymptomatic or really mildly affected.
Posts
I hear there's going to be some spots open on a cruise soon... (Yes, someone who handled Ebola samples went on a cruise)
Diablo 3 - ArtfulDodger#1572
Minecraft - ArtfulDodger42
If someone thinks they might have ebola and is trying to get into the U.S. it's because they want medical treatment, not because they have aspirations of being a plague zombie.
It behooves us to simply treat the ones who come here rather than forcing them into hiding and plague-zombiedom.
The most obvious solution would be to improve the healthcare and sanitation of the Third World, but it is a bit late for that. The systemic changes necessary would require years, and a purge of the corruption.
Closing the borders would result in massive economic drawbacks worldwide, which in turn would severally reduce the amount of resources nations have available for anti-Ebola efforts. Think about how many products you buy that are made in other countries. We're talking a potential worldwide Depression here. And even then, people with nothing to lose would find a way to cross a border, or die trying. Closing the borders would only make sense if we were talking about "The Stand" level of epidemic.
As counter-productive as it may sound, the best way to handle this may be to offer some kind of amnesty / quick-access to anyone at risk for Ebola who enters the U.S. Get them off the streets and into isolation with experienced and prepared medical personnel as quickly as possible, and don't scare them away from seeking treatment. It may even be desirable to import Ebola cases, so that people use that means to seek treatment. Also, it would enable U.S. personnel to get experience with the disease and processes before it potentially becomes epidemic in the U.S.
Diablo 3 - ArtfulDodger#1572
Minecraft - ArtfulDodger42
Diablo 3 - ArtfulDodger#1572
Minecraft - ArtfulDodger42
Those numbers are misleading. On the one hand you have the CDC who has their own receptionist group, accounting, hotelling, mailroom, janitors, motorpool, ect. All of those people count into the number of people working at the CDC.
USAMRIID? Finance, janitorial staff, motorpool, network and IT is all handled by the USAMRMC staff already on base leaving the 800 or so people working at the USAMRIID as just the people who are designated as researchers, doctors, and support for biological research and defense.
Heck, more people died of malaria in the US (5) last year than have died of Ebola here. We should be much more concerned about Malaria and Yellow Fever becoming more widespread in the US (re-emerging) than Ebola.
People with easily treated disease who aren't treated due to lack of resources, diminished aid (both due to logistics and reallocation to ebola efforts), etc.
I find that totally believable.
Just the death toll on healthcare workers in the affected areas alone guarantees further significant loss of life from non-ebola causes.
Or the health care workers not available to care for non-ebola patients because they're in isolation due to questionable contact with a known or suspected ebola patient.
There are many reports that crops are not being harvested in Liberia and Sierra Leone and are just being left to rot in the fields. Prices for food have been doubling and tripling from lack of harvests and surrounding borders being closed.
There's a reason they wanted to press charges on Duncan before he died, he put a lot of people at risk of DEATH. I am actually 100% in favor of helping as many people as possible, but the second someone with the Ebola virus in them gets on a plane they are putting many innocent people at risk of DEATH. There is not enough data to know what is going on, remember until recently they were saying it took 7 days to develop symptoms, now it's 21 days. It is mutating so fast because of all the human to human transmissions that it is a huge concern. Yes, more people die of the flu than ebola, but in the past few weeks Ebola has infected more people than it has in recorded history. This is a major and very deadly virus that is much more of a danger than the flu, and that danger is only increasing. They need to have 100% containment to get rid of it. It replaces 10% of your bodily fluids to pure virus, making it highly contagious. Flu doesn't do that.
Holy fearmongering, Batman.
I missed that gem
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/index.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141015-ebola-virus-outbreak-pandemic-zoonotic-contagion/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-15/ebola-outbreak-boosts-odds-of-mutation-helping-it-spread.html
http://www.canada.com/health/studies+possible+Ebola+mutation+cause+nurses+infection/10296039/story.html
not fear-mongering, I don't watch fox or vote republican, just stating facts like they don't know enough about the virus, but what they do know is that it is extremely dangerous and much more contagious than flu which can largely be controlled through vaccinations/medicine that isn't available for ebola. it isn't airborne, but it doesn't need to be to be very contagious
http://www.newsday.com/opinion/five-myths-about-ebola-laurie-garrett-1.9489635
"Yes, the virus is mutating - a recent paper in Science shows that more than 300 mutations have occurred. But what is now a virus that latches onto receptors outside endothelial cells lining the circulatory system won’t change into one that can attach to the alveolar cells of the lungs. That’s a genetic leap in the realm of science fiction."
EDIT: and yeah, I don't know how many times I have to say it but it isn't airborne and probably won't ever mutate to let it be, that's conservative/fox/republican fear-mongering which I'm not doing, I agree that they're lying to people about that. rna-based viruses mutate as they transmit from host to host hundreds and thousands of times
"Ebola is an RNA virus, which means it mutates quickly. So you may not get infected with the exact same strain, but you might get infected with a new strain."
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2014/04/study-growing-guinea-outbreak-caused-new-ebola-strain
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/history/chronology.html
Ma'am, it appears that your tumor is now 20% of your body.
The bubonic > pneumonic plauge transition, and cholera's rapid adaption to environment were almost movie bad. Though were are talking about decades long epidemics.
But Ebola is ridiculously stable and has shown basically zero mutation. All of it that we've bothered to look at is the same.
Did you even read these? Edit: Didn't catch your edit about being airborne. Standing by the fact that any significant mutation to the strain as a whole would require a far longer timespan than being bandied about, though.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
Viruses are very sloppy in the conservation of their own genetic material and make frequent mistakes. The majority of mutations in a virus are silent (do nothing, change nothing). Mutations that cause a gain of function or loss of function are the mutations that are significant and need to be worried about. The news has taken the word "mutation", i.e. the variance in genetic information, to mean "change and increase in virulence and pathogenicity". That is simply not true.
For example, as I typed this, several cells in your body accumulated genetic mutations. Did your cells turn into something else? Nope.
I think I'm 5% cold virus.
Maybe even 6%.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
Sorry, you have now been quarantined.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
The solution is leeches.
I'm sorry M'aam.
He's gone... he's gone full virus
I guess it depends on what they're thinking with...
Morning news here is basically EbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaTrafficWeatherEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaEbolaWeatherTrafficEbolaEbolaEbolaEbola. And, while they haven't yet succumbed to spreading bullshit ideas about it, this non-stop crap is only going to do the same thing.
So now, people are putting themselves in self-quarentine which obviously can only end well.
Are these interesting times?
https://what-if.xkcd.com/80/
gamertag:Maguano71
Switch:SW-8428-8279-1687
More people have probably died from WNV in the last month here than Ebola. And you can get it by being bit by a bug. And they spent so little time talking about it. I spent this past summer working outside and donating blood to these fucking bugs and I'm more concerned about the itchy welts they'd leave behind.
that was the best article I've ever read
Sorry, could you please quote the relevant passage from that link you provided that says what you say it says? Because I don't want to really go through the pages and pages of technical medical jargon to find it myself, but if it does indeed say that I would like to know.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
The transition from bubonic to pneumonic plague is not the result of mutation. Also, neither plague nor cholera are viral.
- John Stuart Mill
I skimmed over the entire thing and read wherever they were talking about fluids and saw no indication of what he said. I'm thinking he may have read that elsewhere and had that link placed as proof. Perhaps thinking that since it is scientific and technical that no one would really read through it to dispute it. I'm open to the guy quoting the exact part he got that from, but I highly doubt it is in there. It is an great source to see the tests done and the risks of oinfections from various fliuids (semen, breast milk, blood, saliva) and that they even came to the conclusion that it isn't able to be processed by the kidneys since it isn't found in urine and so catching it from a toilet used by an infected or recovering person would be difficult without actual blood being present. Interesting read really.
Heaven forbid you become 100% virus. We all know what happens then.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Bats and Monkeys are natural carriers in the african jungle, I believe.
Not at all a stupid question. A very valid one that many scientists are working on as we don't know the answer! There are indications that it may be associated with bats and other bush meat but nobody has proved a transmission route conclusively.
Non-human primates can catch it but aren't thought to be part of the natural reservoir because it's as good at killing them as us. The natural animal reservoir will probably either be asymptomatic or really mildly affected.