Ebola

[Deepwater6]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29096405

 

This situation seems to be lost behind ISIS  and the Ukraine fighting. Getting resources and medical personnel must be a challenge given the area's affected geographically. The way some remains are tended to after death is also making things harder for caregivers.

 

This "lock down" doesn't seem practical to me. It will be hard to get that much of the public to obey and it seems Sierra Leone is doing this as an act of desperation. Again given the different locations and cultures it is hard to get a good account of what's really happening, and I surmise sometimes these infected numbers are purposely skewed to avoid panic. Either way this doesn't seem like a viable plan in my opinion.

 

It seems to me that WHO has been one or two steps behind this outbreak from the beginning. The organization seems to continually under estimate its spread.

 

When they brought one of the American doctors back for treatment the news said he would be treated with a experimental and secret medicine. Why would something like that need to be secret? We all know that viruses have been investigated for use as weapons, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. I just find it odd it was described like that on TV. I have no problem bringing the doctor back to America or anyone else from any country if we could help them and they follow strict safety measures.

 

My question essentially, is anyone else disappointed with WHO's response to this outbreak? Does anyone have concerns that if a virus even more aggressive and deadlier than Ebola arose WHO would not be up to the task of stopping it?

 

[Eclogite]

No news report I heard referred to any "secret" medicine. Certainly on one broadcast the BBC devoted considerable time to explaining what the treatment involved, what the risks were, and what would be required to produce practical quantities of the drug. The piece, a radio item, lasted around fifteen minutes.

 

The WHO does not have dictatorial powers in any part of the world. They can advise and provide certain levels and types of assitance. What do you think they should have done differently, within their powers? Saying they should have done more is not a sufficient answer. What specific shortfalls do you believe were present in their actions to date.

 

Specifally, can you provide me with written WHO estimates and show me where these have fallen significantly short of the actual spread. I am not saying this has not occured, but you seem to be basing much of your thinking on TV news. You haven't been sneaking a look at FoxNews have you? :)

[labelwench]

Actually, the influenza virus of 1918 was far deadlier than Ebola has been to date, by several magnitudes. It seems that the very fact that Ebola has not killed people in (such) large numbers and that it is largely confined to other continents where international financial stakes are of less significance, that the money and resources needed to develop counter-measures has not been forthcoming.

 

On this continent, the more recent SARS outbreak was of greater concern to most people than Ebola, as Ebola is less easily transmitted.

 

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/08/11/remember-sars-lessons-during-ebola-scare-doc

 

Do I have confidence that we have the resources to deal with any unexpected viral outbreak?

 

Not at all. Nature holds the stronger hand in the high stakes game of life.

[Deepwater6]

No news report I heard referred to any "secret" medicine. Certainly on one broadcast the BBC devoted considerable time to explaining what the treatment involved, what the risks were, and what would be required to produce practical quantities of the drug. The piece, a radio item, lasted around fifteen minutes.

 

The WHO does not have dictatorial powers in any part of the world. They can advise and provide certain levels and types of assitance. What do you think they should have done differently, within their powers? Saying they should have done more is not a sufficient answer. What specific shortfalls do you believe were present in their actions to date.

 

Specifally, can you provide me with written WHO estimates and show me where these have fallen significantly short of the actual spread. I am not saying this has not occured, but you seem to be basing much of your thinking on TV news. You haven't been sneaking a look at FoxNews have you? :)

http://www.who.int/research/en/

 

 

Well to answer your last question first, no, my family will not allow me to watch FoxNews anymore. They claim I get too upset and worry I will have a stroke. It mystifies me as to where FN even comes up with half of its agenda.

 

I have attached the WHO website. Yes, you are correct I need to compare data to see how effective WHO has been in comparison to other outbreaks similar to this event. For me other outbreaks in recent memory have been isolated or contained fairly quickly. I also agree and didn't think about what powers governments are allowing WHO to preform. Logically governments would take full advantage of these resources to protect their citizens, but that's thinking as an idealist.

 

Zeroing in on the numbers for comparison is difficult in these situations. With government interference the waters only get muddier, but it seems the WHO allowed a lot travel in and out of infected zones. Additional restricted travel (if it was in WHO's power) is what I think they could of done a better job of. No hard data from me on that just my perception of a fluid situation.

 

For the record I like BBC and think its the best news outlet to get a true and clear view of what is happening in the world today. :weather_rain:

 

 

 

 There is so much data on the site it may take some time, but just glancing over the WHO site shows some very sad numbers.

[Eclogite]

Well to answer your last question first, no, my family will not allow me to watch FoxNews anymore. They claim I get too upset and worry I will have a stroke.

I understand the definition of a liberal is someone who is liable to have a stroke watching FoxNews. :)

[sanctus]

The ones to blame is our western governments not the WHO. Both the WHO and "Medecins sans frontiers" (don't know if they translate their name to English, would be something like "Doctors without borders") are calling for more resources to be sent.

See this link:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29115298

 

Liberia after war had 1 doctor per 100k people, now less since some died. So far the UK said it plans to build a 50-bed hospital, the US to send a 25-bed field hospital (from the link : "while the US announced that it would send a 25-bed field hospital to Liberia at a cost of $22 million.", does this actually mean that Liberia has to PAY FOR IT?). So all our governments are doing is saying like we "ohh, that is bad" but don't do anything more.

 

There is this article I think is amazing, one of the authors is the president of the WOrld Bank (so they can do also something good or at least have an understanding of) and it seems that Bush has also done cool stuff (read the article and then you know what I mean):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-missing-in-the-ebola-fight-in-west-africa/2014/08/31/19d6dafc-2fb4-11e4-9b98-848790384093_story.html

 

I really don't understand why we do not send more stuff there, for once it would be a kind of aid which has no risk of getting lost in corruption!!

[sanctus]

Getting there: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29145497

[Deepwater6]

Getting there: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29145497

Yes it does seem to be ramping up. What puzzles me is that you never see countries like China, Russia, or Brazil donating to causes such as this or other storm recovery events. I never here anything about some other countries donating to these causes. Now it could be very well be that they do and the media only reports our good deeds to make us feel superior.  Superior to other countries because we are so powerful we have the ability to help out when they can't. Maybe it's to show those other countries what we can do. But probable most important is that victims of these unfortunate events open food and water packages marked USA. Could this help with future attempts at imperialism in that area?

 

In this case I have read that China hungry for oil has spent a lot of time and money in Africa. With that investment and possible potential for resources I would think they would believe it's in China's best interest to help out. Obviously they don't have the economy or wealth of the US system, however some of these countries have spent money in their own country that could have gone to disaster relief. As much of a fan I am of increasing our space program all over the world China, India, etc. could surely reallocate to help out.

 

Yes, there are people starving in India and China it's true, but a lot of the same problems also hold true in the UK and USA too, but they seem to find a way to help or at least they are better at getting the message out that they help. Their motivation for doing so not withstanding.

[Boerseun]

Well, this whole thing strikes pretty close to home for me, at least.

 

The problem isn't about who's helping and who's not, the problem is purely ignorance and superstition. The very first priority in cases such as these should be complete isolation of infected individuals and proper disposal of the corpses of those who died from it. And this is where the problem begins.

 

Patients showing signs of Ebola are isolated by medical personnel, and more than 50% of them die shortly thereafter. The local population, in their ignorance of the matter, assumes that the evil medical people have abducted their loved one and he or she died not in spite of their efforts, but BECAUSE of them. The word spreads, and the next guy to show symptoms of Ebola is now hidden away from the med staff, because the medics will kill him. True story. Look it up. Some WHO spokesperson said earlier the week that Liberia's very existence as a nation is at stake because of this. And I can't see that comment being too far off the mark.

 

My problem is that the South African (my country's) foreign minister have reopened all flights to and from West Africa, including Liberia and all other affected areas, saying that any travel bans will be bad for the economies of both western and Southern Africa. Of course it will be. Until the first shack-dweller in a densely populated place like Alexandra or Kayelitsha townships starts heammoraging. Then the economy will be the last of our problems.

 

Fixing this? Not a chance in hell (my opinion). Not unless a massive education program can drive the realities of this outbreak home. And that will be very hard to do in a place where you being unwell in any shape or form is squarely blamed on you somehow pissing off some obscure ancestor. Taking the education route will then necessarily entail destroying their ancient ancestral beliefs and myths. Anybody up for that?

 

What, I hear you say - surely the people of West Africa are now living in the modern world and they all know about viruses and bacteria and germs and medicine and they know that their presumed superstitions are bullshit?

 

Think again.

 

The Islamic terrorists of this world are very sophisticated in technology, business, computers and such, yet they firmly cling to the belief that 72 virgins will welcome them into the afterlife if they blow themselves to pieces.

 

Superstition is rife.

 

And much more so in Western Africa, which isn't nearly as sophisticated as even the Islamic World.

 

I see this ramping up to massive levels. And with the free comings and goings of my fellow countrymen to West Africa I expect to see the first case in my neck of the woods pretty soon. But with most of the competent doctors having emigrated to America, Canada, New Zealand and Australia over the last decade or so, I don't think anybody would know what the poor sod died of if he happened to die here, in SA. Thousands of people will be infected before anybody will notice we have a problem, because the WHO reckons we can look after ourselves and has a zero presence in SA, whilst 90% or our competent doctors have moved to other countries. And the 10% that's left have never seen ebola and have no idea what to look for. And, as a matter of fact, the scariest thing in SA is that currently, nobody seems to give a damn. People in Iceland seem more worried about ebola in West Africa spreading to them that the idiots in Pretoria, who'd rather increase flights to Liberia for a couple extra dollars in backhanded bribes than think about temporary isolation and the wellbeing of my country.

 

Vigorously enforced isolation would have been the only ticket here. Even at gunpoint, if need be. But I fear with the number of cases we've long since passed the point where that is at all doable.

 

I fear for Liberia. And for my country. Because stupid idiot politicians reckon they know better than scientifically trained medical personnel, and stupid ignorant idiots with childish superstitions undoes all the good work that said medical personnel tries to do.

[Deepwater6]

Some very good points Boersuen, Feeling a sense of fear due to your proximity to the situation must be troubling. Having politicians putting the economy in higher importance only serves to exacerbate the situation.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/12/health/ebola-airborne/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

This article from the CNN site discusses the possibilities of mutation and the virus going airborne. It also has some compelling pictures of the tragedy. There is something else at the bottom of the article that caught my eye that I think is important. There are many individual donors be them countries or foundations, but there seems to be no one in charge. No one to organize and direct these resources. Which brings us back to my original post. Who should be the country or agency that needs to step up into that role quickly? If the situation has grown beyond something WHO can handle then some other group or groups had better get together soon or this could get even more ugly real fast.
 

[labelwench]

I can very well relate to your concerns, Boerseun. This outbreak of Ebola seems more persistent than previous ones and the ability of viruses to mutate and to be spread by modern speed of travel should be a high priority for all nations.

 

The Ebola outbreak could hit 15 countries across Africa - putting the lives of 22 million people at risk, a groundbreaking study has found.

In a world first, Oxford scientists have created a new map of places most at risk of an Ebola outbreak. They warn regions likely to be home to animals harbouring the virus are more widespread than previously feared, particularly in West Africa.

 

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2752911/Ebola-hit-15-countries-Africa-Study-disease-spread-past-finds-70million-people-risk-infection.html#ixzz3DAhFCVlA
 

 

[Deepwater6]

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/obama-unveil-expanded-ebola-response/story?id=25526100

US sending 3000 to help. President calls it a national security issue. It seems the outbreak and the fear of airborne mutation is getting some attention.

[sanctus]

Borseun, I think what you say is only one side of the story. Yes, it spreads a lot thanks to superstition. But there is also people knocking on hospital doors in Monrovia and being sent home even if clear that they are infected since there just no more spaces available...My point is, also missing infrastructure and medical personel is also a huge factor. And this latter factor is one which all of us in the richer countries could help to alleviate.

Btw, it was Liberias defence minister and not WHO-guy who said that "Ebola outbreak "threatens Liberia's national existence" , not that this really matters ;-).

 

What I wonder about is: the superstition level and the infrastructure in Uganda is presumably as high as in western Africa, so why was it always contained there? If I remember correctly, it was village elders who sealed off affected villages...

[Deepwater6]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/19/health/ebola-guinea-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

 

An unfortunate incident to say the least. As many of you have stated, a huge part of fighting this outbreak must include educating people in fear that reside in inaccessible areas.
 

[Deepwater6]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/hospital-us-ebola-patient-in-critical-condition/ar-BB7tYke

 

Do you think the monitoring of 50 people who came in contact with him means they are in isolation? Since it hasn't mutated to an airborne virus as of yet, I wonder if educating them about exchanging bodily fluids will be sufficient. If others start showing symptoms they would then have to monitor 50 or so friends and one night stands of said hypothetical patients. 

 

It's a crazy world out there. someone should sell tickets.

[Buffy]

No, monitoring means monitoring. If you're told that you've got a 50% chance of dying if you ignore any of the symptoms versus a 100% chance of survival (so far) if you get treated in the US, do you think there are going to be a lot of people in that monitored 50 who won't run to the doctor if they have even one symptom?

 

Since it is absolutely not transmissible until you have symptoms, there's absolutely no reason to quarantine the people who have been exposed.

 

There are however raving lunatics demanding we stop all people from Africa from entering the US and locking up everyone in sight.

 

And when you have even the police seeing zombies in the streets, you know you have more of a education problem than a public health problem.

 

More Ebola info from the CDC here.

 

 

Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less, :phones:

Buffy 

[Deepwater6]

Hi Buffy, - Yes about the symptoms and the degree of progression they need to be before transmittal. I must admit I'm ignorant of the very onset of symptoms for this disease. I have, like most of us seen the horrific pictures of someone suffering from the full blown effects of it.

 

Here are the problems with the monitoring that I see. From what I've read men more than women are more reluctant to go to the doctor for several reasons. But's lets suppose me a fifty something year old man is one of the people who is being monitored by the health officials. Since I stated my ignorance of onset problems lets use a slight sore throat as a symptom I get. Now I have to make some decisions.

 

Some men may say ahhh that's a normal cold coming on I'm not going to report it. I would also have to consider what this is going to do to the people around me. Yes this may save my life, but the first patient had all his belongings taken away. There would be a good chance that media driven panic and pressure for a second infected person would force isolation for my family friends I've had contact with. My daughter Suzy finally has that dream job interview she's worked her whole life to get. I would ruin all that with this admission that could turn out to be nothing. It sounds crazy, but this is just one possible scenario I can think of. What scares me is the thousand I can't come up with.

 

Add to the fact that we have all read in the past of stories of people who have confirmed STD's purposely having sex with others. They may have anger issues because of their situation or they be addicted to sex. So a monitored fifty something year old with a sore throat calls an escort service and tells no one because of the embarrassment it would cause the wife and the rest of the family.

 

Basically what I'm asking is what is the symptom tipping point? The disease cannot be transmitted until symptoms are developed I understand, but what is the official symptom danger point?

 

BTW - I am a fifty something, but I'm not married and I don't call escort services. The previous scenario was for purely theatrical reasons. :)