Posted on 08/14/2014 5:31:04 PM PDT by dayglored
Staff with the World Health Organisation battling an Ebola outbreak in West Africa see evidence the numbers of reported cases and deaths vastly underestimates the scale of the outbreak, the U.N. agency said on its website on Thursday.
The death toll from the world's worst outbreak of Ebola stood on Wednesday at 1,069 from 1,975 confirmed, probable and suspected cases, the agency said. The majority were in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia, while four people have died in Nigeria.
The agency's apparent acknowledgement the situation is worse than previously thought could spur governments and aid organisations to take stronger measures against the virus.
"Staff at the outbreak sites see evidence that the numbers of reported cases and deaths vastly underestimate the magnitude of the outbreak," the organisation said on its website.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Prayers up for all who are or will be victims of this plague.
St. Rocco/Roch, pray for us.
Must be a new trend. During W’s admin they were the one’s photoshopping photos of supposed atrocities committed by US soldiers. Caught in the act.
The apologized, so all is well now.
PJ, where are you getting your numbers. I’ve been using a spreadsheet to track cases and deaths, and using some normalizing to get the numbers down to averages. The reporting isn’t daily. Sometimes there are 2 and 3 day gaps in the figures, and then there are massive spikes.
What I have for AVG new cases per day is 21.6, and deaths per day, AVG is up to 11.2.
I have trend line figures that are starting to go ballistic.
The numbers I’m using are the WHO/CDC numbers that have been posted to a wiki page - 2014 West Africa Ebola Outbreak.
If you have another source, I’d been interested in comparing those numbers with what CDC is putting out.
Thx
They admit their numbers are probably only 25 to 50% of the real numbers. So the real numbers are somewhere between 2 to 4 times as great. Number of dead is really 2,000 - 4,000.
Might be money well spent
Can't find the link so I am going from memory
The numbers thus far and of course subject to change.
Each Ebola victim infects 1.8 people. 60 to 70 percent die After one year (march 2015) there will be 170,000 infected 110,000 dead
After two years (march 2016) there will be 310,000,000 infected 200,000,000 dead
After three years (march 2017) there will be 6 billion infected and 4 billion dead.
Scary numbers, I seriously doubt the numbers are that bad, but those are the numbers as of now.
Oh one more thing, WHO says it's numbers are probably only 25-50% of the real numbers due to under reporting of Ebola.
Really? SARS has never been reported in Turkey.
A link to this thread has been posted on the Ebola Surveillance Thread
Thanks for the ping,Joe.
A frightening topic.
.
It is indeed cause for concern (we can always panic later...)
SARA was most definitely reported in Turkey. It was about the last gasp of the press hustle. The one village is the only place that got any attention. I don’t know where else in the area it was but if a whole village was positive then chances are it was a lot more widespread than that one village. As I recall Vietnam was one of the centers of it and at first I read about all the many deaths. Later it turned out to have been a very small number and consistent with a not very large flu outbreak except that the only people reported as having the disease were the ones who went to the hospital so the “rate” was high. How many people go to the hospital with flu? I never even went to a doctor back when I was getting that sort of thing.
OK, cool.
Same numbers I have. I’ve been averaging back to May 23. WHO/CDC reported numbers on May 14 and May 23 (9 days with no report?)
The inflection point was somewhere in there.
Between Apr2 and May 14, there were 0.61 deaths per day and only 9 people infected per day, on average.
Now we’re up to 21 infected per day, average, and 11 dead.
Now everyone is admitting the numbers could be off by at least a factor of 2, and as much as a factor of 4.
Thanks for replying. I just want to make sure there isn’t a better source of data out there.
Even with the cases referenced in the Reuters article, the actual data, averaging back to May 23, is more like 21/day infected.
The deaths number is somewhat interesting, but it’s the cases number that is the important one here.
Nobody is mentioning an R0 at this point - a basic reproduction rate that would indicate a) whether it will burn itself out, or b) how long it would take to spread through a population.
Thanks for the ping!
You should let the WHO know about this because they haven’t heard.
http://www.who.int/entity/csr/sars/country/country2003_08_15.pdf?ua=1
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.