Exponential Ebola

American Thinker ^ | 10/16/2014

[Altura Ct.]

Exponential expansion of an infectious disease occurs when the rate of growth is proportional to the number of people currently infected. The mathematical formula for exponential growth is:

[x_t = x_0(1+r)^t]

In the case of Ebola, xt represents the total number of people infected, xₒ represents the number of index cases at the starting point, r represents the rate of disease transmission (believed to be about 2 for Ebola, i.e.: each Ebola victim transmits the disease on average to 2 other people), and t (as an exponent) represents the time interval used for measurement (months). The formula reduces to xt = 3ᵗ for a transmission rate of two with a single index case. Since 70% of Ebola patients die, and since the survivors no longer transmit the disease, the formula for Ebola cases further reduces to xt = 2ᵗ.

With a transmission rate of 2 and a one-month transmission time, there would be 2 active Ebola cases at the end of the first month, assuming the index case either died or survived with immunity. In two months there would be 4 cases, in three months 8 cases, in four months 16 cases, in six months 64 cases, in nine months 512 cases, in one year 4,096 cases, and in two years 16,777,216 cases. If cases emerge after three weeks instead of four weeks, the numbers are much worse. If healthcare workers die off early in the Ebola epidemic, as one would expect with no vaccination and inadequate protection, then the transmission rate would increase from 2 to who knows how high, also leading to much higher case numbers.

[BCW]

Interesting article - I was just wondering this very question...it’s a shame that it had to end up here in the US before someone sat down and did the figuring...

Last evening - The Five on Fox - one of the reporters was basically lecturing the rest of us about not fear mongering and that Ebola is not the worst case scenario everyone is making it out to be...

Then again, this is the same news worthless people (plus all the other MSM idiots) that let Obama into office unchallenged due to fears of being labeled a racist and having their shows cancelled....so why would I listen to a bunch of people who go off of research that other people do for them and turn it around for a 1 hr talk show/discussion among self-styled elitist?

[Candor7]

Congress should convene for an emergency impeachment procedure. This bastid is about to destroy America and be allwed to walk away shrugging?

STOP HIM! NOW!

[BCW]

Here it is @ 5:20

http://video.foxnews.com/v/3841297036001/president-cancels-fundraisers-in-wake-of-2nd-ebola-diagnosis/?playlist_id=1040983441001#sp=show-clips

Greg Gutfeld lectures the rest of us...

“You will die from a hundred different things...”

[nathanbedford]

ping

[petercooper]

The wheels are in motion. The U.S. is already destroyed.

[palmer]

What if our healthcare system, as good as it is, was unable to alter a transmission rate (r) of 2 for Ebola? All that would be necessary for this to happen is for each Ebola victim in turn to infect one family member, and one friend, stranger or healthcare worker.

Duncan had diarrhea and vomiting the night before he went to the hospital and infected zero people in the apartment. It appears the only reason he infected two healthcare workers is CDC stupidity.

The problem with the author's numbers is that he gathers his statistics from a particularly stupid subset of the human population in W. Africa. These are the people who carry corpses around in taxis. They kiss the bodies. They hide their relatives who are dying of ebola from the authorities. None of those statistics apply here.

What does apply here is the fact that Obama is bringing 150 Ebola refugees here a day. That number is sure to increase. The number of infected refugees, currently roughly 1 in 1000 is also sure to increase. Each of the refugees brings a unique set of risks to America. None of them are a statistic. Some might be terrorists and a much greater threat. Most will just cost us $1m in municipal expenses plus $500k in hospital expenses not to mention the risk to hospital employees.

It's important to focus on the source of the problem: the influx of Ebola refugees who will kill actual Americans, not just statistical Americans.

[ClearCase_guy]

infected zero people in the apartment

Where are those people, and do we know that they are uninfected?

[palmer]

They were hidden away by the authorities, however one was interviewed a couple days ago by the post:

"Everybody's okay," said Aaron Yah, who is in quarantine along with other relatives of Duncan. He said that no one, including Duncan's girlfriend, has shown any signs of infection.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-chief-after-dallas-nurses-ebola-infection-us-must-rethink-protocols/2014/10/13/5317a9a8-530f-11e4-809b-8cc0a295c773_story.html

[nonliberal]

African diseases that will kill you: AIDS, Ebola, Obama.

[wastoute]

Now start with the 8,000 the WHO will admit to. Over a billion by next Thanksgiving...

[wastoute]

The thing you seem to miss is that while this thing spins up our protection by isolation diminishes. Out of 8,000 we had ONE come in. How many will we have when the global burden is much higher? When it is a million will we get one hundred? Your calculations are static. The situation is dynamic.

[palmer]

Did you miss where I said “sure to increase” twice? We are going to be screwed even with 150 a day and 1 in 1000 infected. That’s one new case a week. With more than that there will be chaos.

[wastoute]

I think I meant you had severely underestimated the threat. The numbers you posted extrapolated from the one case. You did mention “sure to increase” but I think you don’t realize yours is essentially a “best case scenario”. Sure 100 coming to the US per million of global burden may be “worst case” but the point I want to emphasize is that once our “defenses” such as they are have been overwhelmed worst case becomes best case in weeks. As Brad Thor pointed out the other day economic collapse occurs before “widespread” viral transmission. Does this aid or inhibit viral contagion? I imagine one would see several waves statistically like pebbles in a pond. A wave of economic collapse ahead of widespread contagion followed by a slower moving wave of near complete devastation due to inhibited travel but more certain contamination due to collapse of infrastructure other than transportation. This model sort of implicitly follows “one pebble into the pond”. This is also an erroneous assumption. As I said earlier we will soon be faced with dozens then hundreds, etc.

There could be events that alter things significantly. Fer instance let’s say that a market crash occurs in the next few days. Total social collapse ensues. Thousands if not millions of Americans die in the violence BUT NONE FROM Obola. The wreckage would be extensive but salvageable. The tragedy could actually SAVE the survivors from a greater tragedy, a relentless one.

None of us KNOWS with much certainty what the future holds but it is clear to anyone that is not absolutely delusional that those making decisions do not have our best interests in mind.

[palmer]

I think you are overestimating the spread. When we collapse to the point that families are transporting ebola corpses in taxis, then I will be wrong. But long before we get to that point, we will trace actual contacts (not pretend contacts like people on the plane from Cleveland), we will isolate the sick, and transmission will stop.

The actual problem is in the numbers coming in from Africa. There I could be underestimating as their disease spreads into more affluent classes who can afford a plane ticket to get here. We may have one infected a day incoming which will paralyze a lot of hospitals. There are other vectors I haven't thought about and some I have (e.g. terrorism).

But above all I am realistic about how it spreads. I know our economy is not as robust as it should be and panic will not help. But widespread "contamination" and infection is not in the cards.