[ElenaM]

Did you bother to read the quoted material? It's about AEROSOLS. You said Ebola cannot infect cells in the respiratory tract. I asked for a cite and you give me Scientific American? After demanding a PubMed cite for something I didn't write? Are you saying that cilia prevent Ebola glycoprotein spikes from adhering to ciliated epithelial cells? Where is your cite for that? I'm quickly coming to think that you are not the least bit interested in serious conversation/debate on this topic. For some odd reason you are fixated on the utter impossibility of epidemiological "airborne" and fomite transmission to the exclusion of all else, and literally nothing will cause you to step back and actually think about the topic. In a year or so we'll have a lot more data on the various transmission types. I suppose we'll know by then whether the "must be puked/bled on" theme is accurate. I sincerely hope it is accurate but everything I read and hear outside of mass media (which parrots the politicians and bureaucrats in the government health agencies) says that Ebola transmission vectors are far more extensive than that. Whom to believe: an AP reporter, a politician, a political appointee or a research virologist? I don't find that a difficult choice.

[exDemMom]

Did you bother to read the quoted material?

I guess you missed the part where I said I've already read that paper (several times, in fact). Furthermore, despite your insistence that that paper was about aerosols, it was not.

Of course I quoted Scientific American to you. I will be honest--your level of understanding of the subject that you have repeatedly communicated tells me very strongly that you do not have a PhD, nor do you have the scientific understanding that a PhD trained scientist gains from years of both reading papers and doing research in the lab. You have not demonstrated that you know anything about the basic structure of cells, how viruses replicate, shed, and spread, etc. So I choose a source written at what I perceive is your level of understanding. Don't worry--I read it myself to make sure the information is accurate; I will never link to an article that is factually inaccurate.

The reason I am so fixated on the minute details of transmission is because only an accurate understanding of transmission characteristics allows for the proper infection control measures to be implemented. This outbreak is not going to be stopped by people becoming hysterical over supposed aerosol transmission--it will be stopped by understanding what DOES spread the virus, and taking steps to stop those chains of transmission.

Whom to believe: an AP reporter, a politician, a political appointee or a research virologist? I don't find that a difficult choice.

Where do you think the reporter, politician, and political appointee get their information? They get that information from the people who actually do the research--from people whose education, training, and experience is similar to mine. If they cannot relay the information accurately, it is because they don't have the educational background to really understand what the researchers are trying to tell them.