I’m inclined to believe that there is risk to airborne transmission with Ebola, just not as much as with other diseases. It seems to preferentially attack the alimentary system.
But for a microbe to be able to infect via airborne transmission is so very specific in the micro/virology world. That is why I am saying, to say that it is not airborne, or better yet, transmission is not airborne is a disservice and a horrible lack of public education. For the most part, the laymen has no understanding b/w the specifics of airborne transmission and droplet transmission. This is why I have been so frustrated. I have talked to many people that do not have a background in micro/virology/public health and those that do have an extensive background and the conversations all agree that when an official says that Ebola is not an airborne pathogen, the laymen automatically assume that they cannot contract the disease in an “airborne” manner. I put “airborne” in quotes b/c the laymen assumes that coughs/sneezes et al equate to airborne and that is simply, not scientifically the case due to the transmission via droplets which is TOTALLY different than airborne transmission.
Earlier this week the CDC head got backed into a corner while talking about Ebola transmission.
He stated that if you got within three feet of a person displaying Ebola symptoms you became a person of medical interest whose activities had to be closely monitored. I think this interview was on FOX.
Sorry, but if prolonged standing, and not touching, within three feet of a person makes you a medical person of interest don’t lie to me and say it is not transmitted through the air. We are talking about a technical definitions - nice things in clinical and academic environments but very bad in the “real world” the rest of us live in.