Replies

It's not my field, but I do respect viruses and have a interest in them, but I have to learn from the experts and they say we should not be overly concerned in the US.

The situation in Africa is a little different.

They, as usual, are not doing what they should be doing, and their culture is part of the problem as well.

For us it's a different story, and I think there is a lot we still need to learn about Ebola, that will help with other viruses.

So I don't see the entry into the US of those two American's with the disease to be a negative. In fact, it could be a opportunity.

It seems it was that event that spurred the conversation and some condemnation as well. All useful things I think.

What I fear, and it's not a big thing, is the potential for a error in creating a anti-viral for this specific disease that could backfire into a bad situation if they don't have the data and the time to run every conceivable result in a model.

The virus could overcome it's reluctance to recreate it's self by exchanging RNA with a badly thought out viral delivery system used to deliver a death blow to Ebola. The result being a super bug that actually does all the things that many here fear.

But the more data they get, especially about these unknown proteins, should keep errors to a minimum. I say this because I can only assume that this experimental treatment is a lab designed anti viral that delivers a specific load to the Ebola virus by using another virus to deliver it.

Just thinking out loud...