Not really. At a 90% fatality rate, the outbreak would burn itself out quickly. That's why the apparent 50% rate up to this point has been so terrifying. Half of those getting infected would not die in three weeks, but would continue to move around and spread the infection for six months, and so on.
The 70% fatality rate that WHO chose to report today is slightly less terrifying than the 50% fatality rate, but will result in wider spread, and subsequently an exponentially higher number of deaths than would a 90% fatality rate.
Gee, with this 50% to 70% fatality rate, it's almost like a more perfect biological weapon.
As far as I know every known Ebola patient that came to the USA has recovered. That is called 100% folks.
I've seen people healed from blindness and lifetime crippling ailments at those summer revivals. No kidding. And people in 127 different towns saw the same people miraculously relieved of their hopeless conditions.
Government is an even greater scam.
I still think it is good that people can survive it.
Those who are infected will know because they get sick. When they are sick they (hopefully) will not be purposeful agents to spread the sickness.
The long incubation period is a problem because of your point but that was there whether we can survive it or not.
If it goes as you say then we will see an adjustment in our society with filter masks, gloves and reduced contact.
Hugs will be something we knew as kids but no more.
The simple reality that we can survive this is a very good thing.
As far as the idea that this is a planned and purposeful problem put on the ‘little people’ to reduce the burgeoning population is troubling.
I think evil of that magnitude will meet an end that the perpetrators will not enjoy.
If you truly witness healing and believe then you know that we can survive this.