I think this was posted up-thread, but it bears repeating.
It appears we have to extend the US Ebola quarantine clock over the CDC’s head.
About 1 in 20 Ebola infectees take longer than 21 days to show symptoms.
http://www.naturalnews.com/047267_Ebola_outbreak_incubation_period_viral_transmission.html
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/14-october-2014/en/
Shock W.H.O. report: Ebola has 42-day incubation period, not 21 days!
(NaturalNews) A jaw-dropping report released by the World Health Organization on October 14, 2014 reveals that 1 in 20 Ebola infections has an incubation period longer than the 21 days which has been repeatedly claimed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.
This may be the single most important — and blatantly honest — research report released by any official body since the beginning of the Ebola outbreak. The WHO’s “Ebola situation assessment” report, found here, explains that only 95% of Ebola infections experience incubation within the widely-reported 21-day period. Here’s the actual language from the report:
95% of confirmed cases have an incubation period in the range of 1 to 21 days; 98% have an incubation period that falls within the 1 to 42 day interval. [1]
Unless the sentence structure is somehow misleading, this passage appears to indicate the following:
• 95% of Ebola incubations occur from 1 – 21 days
• 3% of Ebola incubations occur from 21 – 42 days
• 2% of Ebola incubations are not explained (why?)
If this interpretation of the WHO’s statistics are correct, it would mean that:
• 1 in 20 Ebola infections may result in incubations lasting significantly longer than 21 days
• The 21-day quarantine currently being enforced by the CDC is entirely insufficient to halt an outbreak
• People who are released from observation or self-quarantine after 21 days may still become full-blown Ebola patients in the subsequent three weeks, even if they have shown no symptoms of infection during the first 21 days. (Yes, read that again…)
Any declaration that an outbreak is over requires 42 days with no new infections.
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29649572
Keep in mind that there are 4-5 vaccines under development, and the one being developed in Canada is closer to production.
www.ctvnews.ca/health/canada-s-ebola-vaccine-how-does-it-work-1.1959082
IMO the real purpose of the 5000 - 7000 person US military mission in Liberia is to conduct field trials of Ebola vaccines and medications. They'll need controlled populations for true medical trials, which requires convincing the Liberian subjects to stay around to be monitored. The most effective means of doing that is to offer the subjects full medical and subsidence care while they are being monitored.
Which is why the US force is the size it is. They'll probably operate multiple camps for a few hundred medium-term Liberian residents per camp. This will be a humanitarian God-send for the Liberians, as well as making it easy for the US Army medical technicians to monitor the Liberians.
But they need real Ebola vaccines as well as treatment that is more than palliative care, and that means new medications under development. Which there are of both.
The timing of the camp building and projected availability of the Canadian vaccine, plus the known production lead-time for the vaccine based on the Novartis article I posted above, all look like field trials starting in Liberia in January.
This group might include those infected by fomites, wind borne droplets, skin contact (sweaty or dry), or contact with unknown but asymptomatic people or animals
. This is the gray area where we don't know how little it takes to get infected.
We know sure ways to get the disease, but these others are not well understood because the routes of infection are not easily documented (this is the stuff there is no evidence of, but we are being told that absence of evidence precludes anything but the better known vectors).