Replies

Well, Nelson, I guess I missed the panic. link

What I didn't miss was the complete incompetence of the CDC (whose 'guidelines' two nurses were infected with Ebola while using), a lot of pooh-poohing the danger of the pathogen (BSL-4), and no small amount of "move along, nothing to see here".

Some of us were genuinely concerned at the introduction of a novel and lethal pathogen to these shores, and remain so, with good reason.

Certain questions remain unanswered, but projections are based on rates of growth or decline, and given the information at the time seemed valid enough should all factors remain the same.

Those factors did not remain the same, though, and as a result of the media exposure the disease outbreak received and the subsequent response by medical organizations around the world, efforts to reduce, contain, and stop the outbreak continue. Those efforts, including, but not limited to medical personnel, novel treatments, experimental drugs fast-tracked, some things as simple as personal protective equipment that can now be disposed of instead of re-used, just might affect the growth rate of the disease outbreak and render the projections too pessimistic.

In September, none of that was present in the affected area.

Variables changed, and with that the rate of increase.

Past performance is no guarantee of future returns, after all.

Most of the discussion here centered around:

1: Keeping the disease out of the US.

2: The possibility of fomite borne infection in the US, especially in urban areas, and the necessary countermeasures to prevent that should that prove to be as severe as the worst-case scenario (that fluids deposited by an infected person remain infectious through skin, mucous membrane direct contact, or transfer from a surface to a mucous membrane by hand gestures.

There was considerable discussion about the means of transmission, which was not well documented except to state that direct contact with infected persons or the bodily fluids (sweat, saliva, vomit, stools (at that point very liquid), blood, semen, vaginal secretions (?), and possibly tears could transmit the disease, but whether mere contact or transferal to a mucous membrane was a gray area. Similarly, the idea of airborne, or droplet transmission was discussed at length. As I repeatedly said, we knew how much exposure would guarantee infection, but we did not know how little exposure would, partly because those infected in the outbreak had been in close contact with patients or the fresh remains thereof.

That a great deal of concern was expressed is normal, people want to be able to undertake measures to improve their safety, and knowing what you are up against is the first step.

Those answers were not always readily available, nor were they necessarily clear-cut. Different research led to different answers, which led to speculation. Is that panic? Or is it an attempt to identify the bounds of the problem (best-case/worst case) and take whatever measures needed to alleviate the problem?

There is a lot of information in that thread. There is a lot of speculation, too, and no small number of media accounts from the Hot Zone in West Africa.

While many said the disease would never get loose here, it did, briefly. Could it have been worse? Sure.

The outcome of Ebola cases in the US has been stellar, with only a 25% mortality (among those infected, that is 10 times the mortality rate of the Spanish Flu, which while much more widespread and contagious killed only 2.5% of those infected in the most lethal wave, but still less than even the most mild Ebola outbreaks in Africa which had a mortality rate between 30 and 90%).

Keep in mind, though, that at any given time, (as far as we know), the number of cases active in the US has never been over 4. When this started, there were 22 BSL-4 hospital beds in the entire country.

That's right, twenty two. It would not have taken much of an outbreak to overwhelm that, so we dodged a bullet, exposed some serious issues with the ability of the healthcare industry in the US to deal with a lethal and novel pathogen, and, hopefully, that is being remediated.

It is my understanding that the number of beds for a similarly lethal pathogen (BSL-4) will reach nearly 500. That's good, because Ebola is only one such disease.

Our best defense against Ebola has been the ocean between us and the outbreaks. Many of us questioned the wisdom of bringing the disease here and even more questioned the wisdom of leaving travel between the affected countries and the US open without restriction.

While that hasn't had much visible effect, people who were exposed have been monitored in order to limit the spread of the pathogen should they exhibit symptoms. That's a far cry from some guy going into the ER (twice) before someone figures out what's going on.