Posted on 10/09/2015 5:15:56 AM PDT by Olog-hai
London’s Royal Free Hospital says a nurse who recovered from Ebola last year has been hospitalized again and is being treated for an unusual late complication. Her condition is described as serious.
A military aircraft flew Pauline Cafferkey from her home in Scotland to London early Friday. The hospital said she was being treated in its isolation unit. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
28 days later.
Ping.
“hospitalized again and is being treated for an unusual late complication.”
If she dies then London’s Royal Free Hospital has been
successful in crating a mutated version of Ebola that may
be untreatable.
Or maybe we created the mutation...
And meanwhile, how many people was she in contact with throughout that time?
I am wondering if Ebola is similar to chickenpox in that the virus never really goes away 100%. If it lingers and the person is still at risk for a reoccurring infection, then Ebola is a lot more dangerous than initially thought. It may require mass vaccinations to provide any long term society resistance.
It would be scary if something like Ebola did mutate to spread rapidly, turning everyone into bloodthirsty Democrats.
That doesn’t sound good. Sounds like Ebola has resurfaced after being dormant a year. But they aren’t saying where in her body it resurfaced.
Why would you say this is mutated and not simply virus behavior that we were unaware of with the exception of the guy with the late eye infection?
“Why would you say this is mutated”
Because that’s what viruses do.
“virus behavior that we were unaware of”
Unknown behavior or mutation? Well the mutation can easily
be proven but may be suppressed to cover up for incompetence
and unknown behavior would make a good excuse. But, you
do have a point and you could be right.
Ping....
Someone mentioned chicken pox, but herpes comes to mind as well, with active and dormant phases. If that is the case, survival does not equal being cured.
I’m not sure being cured equals survival.
For a long time, there a worry that the virus was popping up again in survivors. For instance, there was an article recently that it will remain viable in the testes and semen.
Part of me thinks that Ebola is much more common than we think.
For biological reasons, Ebola cannot "hide" in the body the way chickenpox does. Chickenpox is a DNA virus, and it can either hide by becoming part of a chromosome or by disguising itself as a chromosome. Ebola cannot do that since it is an RNA virus.
Ebola virus survives in areas of the body that the immune system cannot reach--for instance, in the eye fluid, in breast milk and seminal fluid (where they are stored in glands). Since the immune system cannot reach into those fluid-filled pockets, it cannot kill the virus there. As for the virus, those biological fluids preserve it for prolonged periods since they act as buffers.
A mutation cannot drastically affect virus behavior. The virus cannot change the tissues it infects or its mode of transmission through a mutation. If a mutation affects virus behavior at all, it usually makes the virus unable to propagate. The most important aspect of mutation is that it gives researchers a tool to use to track virus spread, since they look at how the mutation pattern changes across time and distance and can use that information to track the virus back to its origins. They can tell, for instance, if a new Ebola case is related to the current outbreak, or if it is a new outbreak, by looking at the mutations.
I am wondering if the virus hid for this long in her eyes or other fluid compartment in her body, or if she is suffering a complication related to tissue damage caused by the disease, which has only surfaced now although the disease is long gone.
Good. Grief. :(
Thanks for posting.
Thanks for your explanations on how viruses work and the differences between an RNA and DNA virus.
A bit off topic but since you mentioned the Chicken Pox virus, perhaps you “might” know the answer to my question as several pharmacists and nurses and even my own primary care doctor and my numerous internet searches hasn’t been able to answer for me.
I am in my mid 50’s and at not quite to the age where a Shingles vaccine is recommended (at 60+) but am getting close. But having a friend who his my same age and who is going through the severe pain and complications, disability of getting Shingles, I don’t want to go through that if I can avoid it.
But here’s the thing. I don’t really know if I ever had Chicken Pox as a kid or not. My older brother claims I had it as a toddler but I don’t exactly trust his memory and both my parents are now deceased and I don’t have any of my childhood medical records. I do remember that I contracted measles in the 3rd grade but I don’t remember anything about having or my parents ever talking about me ever having Chicken Pox. I do recall in the mid 90’s being exposed to the Chicken Pox virus as one of my great nieces got sick with it and I was around her just before and just after she got sick but I didn’t catch it from her but I don’t know if that means I’m immune because I had it previously or that I was just lucky not to catch it.
So my question is; can I get or is it even safe for me to get a Shingles vaccine if I’ve never had Chicken Pox? Is there any harm in getting a Shingles vaccine if I’ve never had Chicken Pox?
Can a simple blood test determine if I ever had or I carry the Chicken Pox virus? And if a blood test can determine if I ever had Chicken Pox, what sort of blood test should I ask my doctor for? And should I even bother getting a blood test before getting a Shingles vaccine or should I just go ahead and get one anyway?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.