Will Ebola become a big problem in the United States?

[MS256]

The CDC is ultra conservative with regard to transmission of any diseases they monitor. They still list oral sex as an HIV risk despite years of case study where there hasn't been even one documented oral HIV infection. They toss around things like theoretical risk when trying to define risk.

So am I. I happen to think the disease is very hard to spread and unlikely at all to get from surface contact or sneeze droplets. If it was able to be spread easily it would be spreading much more quickly in West Africa (and probably elsewhere).

There is a difference between thinking something is a very low probability and statements of no probability and "we know everything there is to know" (which is silly).

[Golfingdad]

I'm not sure I understand what the amount of time a virus has been around has to do with our understanding of the disease?

It matters because despite the fact that "we" (general American public) don't know much about the disease (because we haven't felt a need to learn before now) doesn't mean that it's new to organizations like the CDC and WHO.  They have been studying and learning about this disease for almost 40 years.  It's not new to them.  Therefore, when they tell me emphatically that I can't get it unless I come into contact with the bodily fluids of an infected person who's symptomatic, then I take them at their word.  They are the experts.

[Lihu]

It matters because despite the fact that "we" (general American public) don't know much about the disease (because we haven't felt a need to learn before now) doesn't mean that it's new to organizations like the CDC and WHO.  They have been studying and learning about this disease for almost 40 years.  It's not new to them.  Therefore, when they tell me emphatically that I can't get it unless I come into contact with the bodily fluids of an infected person who's symptomatic, then I take them at their word.  They are the experts.

Scientists do not "take their own words" without proof.

[Golfingdad]

Scientists do not "take their own words" without proof.

And the CDC and WHO are scientists!  So how much proof do you think is behind their words?!?!?!

[MS256]

Scientists do not "take their own words" without proof.

And in this case they don't even all agree or claim to know it all.

Doctors and scientists usually deal in probabilities and leave knowing it all to internet bloggers.

[Dave2512]

So am I. I happen to think the disease is very hard to spread and unlikely at all to get from surface contact or sneeze droplets. If it was able to be spread easily it would be spreading much more quickly in West Africa (and probably elsewhere).

There is a difference between thinking something is a very low probability and statements of no probability and "we know everything there is to know" (which is silly).

Fair enough but still comes down to risk and understanding the risk, which are rarely equivalent regarding different exposures. I only brought it up relative to the doctor conversation. He would have known the risks. Not limited to ebola. I am sure there are doctors that go to work with various communicable conditions more often than we think. The only thing driving the fear in this instance is the overblown fear of ebola related death.

[Lihu]

And the CDC and WHO are scientists!  So how much proof do you think is behind their words?!?!?!

First of all CDC and WHO are the organizations that alerted us to this current situation, so I don't know why you are using those acronyms as "proof".

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/preparedness/planning-tips-top10.html

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/en/

Take a look at this: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/196/Supplement_2/S142.full

and contrast it to this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/06/ebola-myths_n_5655662.html

One is obviously politically motivated, and the other is not. Can you tell which one? BTW, I am not swayed by FOX news either.

In fact, I have no idea what FOX news or whatever any other popular news organization says about Ebola. My conclusions are simply based upon reading the links I posted above.

And in this case they don't even all agree or claim to know it all.

Doctors and scientists usually deal in probabilities and leave knowing it all to internet bloggers.

Of course, because scientists are also humans. Everyone has their own ideas and theories, they all want to be right.

[iacas]

QFT.

Looks like I won't be selling any of my kool-aid to @Golfingdad

Can I get two Cherry and one Grape please?

[Golfingdad]

First of all CDC and WHO are the organizations that alerted us to this current situation, so I don't know why you are using those acronyms as "proof".

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/preparedness/planning-tips-top10.html

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/en/

Take a look at this: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/196/Supplement_2/S142.full

and contrast it to this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/06/ebola-myths_n_5655662.html

One is obviously politically motivated, and the other is not. Can you tell which one? BTW, I am not swayed by FOX news either.

In fact, I have no idea what FOX news or whatever any other popular news organization says about Ebola. My conclusions are simply based upon reading the links I posted above.

@Lihu my apologies, but you've totally lost me here.  What is your point?

Because I get my information in the exact same way.  And both of those articles say the same thing ... you get Ebola from direct contact with bodily fluids of an infected and symptomatic person.

[Lihu]

@Lihu my apologies, but you've totally lost me here.  What is your point?

Because I get my information in the exact same way.  And both of those articles say the same thing ... you get Ebola from direct contact with bodily fluids of an infected and symptomatic person.

Sorry, then I really had no idea what you were trying to state in your quoted post with all those question marks and exclamation points.

Then you must have also read to exercise caution . This is not just some legal disclaimer.

[iacas]

Sorry, then I really had no idea what you were trying to state in your quoted post with all those question marks and exclamation points.

Then you must have also read to exercise caution. This is not just some legal disclaimer.

@Lihu , I don't know what you're trying to say either. I think you've lost the plot or something. You're not making sense.

In skimming these two facts seem to have been given:

• Scientists at the WHO/CDC have been studying Ebola for 40+ years.
• They regard it as fact that you can transmit it only when symptomatic and by bodily fluids.

Do you not "believe" either of those things to be facts?

[trickyputt]

[QUOTE name="newtogolf" url="/t/77593/will-ebola-become-a-big-problem-in-the-united-states/390_30#post_1070211"]   The fact is he lied to officials about where he went when he returned to NY, that's all I care about.  You and phan can identify all the possible reasons why he lied but that really doesn't matter. [/QUOTE] But how does that matter?  Can Ebola be transferred through fibs now?

lol

[Lihu]

@Lihu, I don't know what you're trying to say either. I think you've lost the plot or something. You're not making sense.

In skimming these two facts seem to have been given:

Scientists at the WHO/CDC have been studying Ebola for 40+ years.

They regard it as fact that you can transmit it only when symptomatic and by bodily fluids.

Do you not "believe" either of those things to be facts?

Why would I need to believe in them? They're facts.

I am simply supporting what I've been stating all along, that we should be careful and have a quarantine period for people coming from areas that are infected. When a person volunteers to help people in Africa, which is very admirable, they should also expect to wait a bit after coming home before exposing themselves to the general public.

This quarantine period should be voluntary . Unfortunately, we have learned that even some doctors do not exercise caution and care.

I am re-posting this link since it does not appear that anyone has read it: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/196/Supplement_2/S142.full

BTW, here are some possible treatments: http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2014-08-28-oxford-lead-ebola-vaccine-trial

[iacas]

Why would I need to believe in them? They're facts.

That's my point: your posts of late seem to contradict what you just said. Your last several posts haven't made much sense at all. [quote name="Lihu" url="/t/77593/will-ebola-become-a-big-problem-in-the-united-states/420#post_1070310"]This quarantine period should be voluntary . Unfortunately, we have learned that even some doctors do not exercise caution and care. [/quote] You lose me there. IMO, the doctor exercised caution and care. As soon as he was symptomatic, he turned himself in. I'm barely following the thread, so perhaps I got that wrong, but if you can't transmit the disease when you are asymptomatic, what does it matter what you do until you show the first sign of a symptom?

[trickyputt]

Uhh, gentlemen that first doc lihu posted is from Oxford, and I am not referring to the small military based town near Anniston, Al. There is a link worth readin.

[trickyputt]

[quote name="Lihu" url="/t/77593/will-ebola-become-a-big-problem-in-the-united-states/420#post_1070310"] Why would I need to believe in them? They're facts.

That's my point: your posts of late seem to contradict what you just said. Your last several posts haven't made much sense at all. [quote name="Lihu" url="/t/77593/will-ebola-become-a-big-problem-in-the-united-states/420#post_1070310"]This quarantine period should be voluntary . Unfortunately, we have learned that even some doctors do not exercise caution and care. [/quote] You lose me there. IMO, the doctor exercised caution and care. As soon as he was symptomatic, he turned himself in. I'm barely following the thread, so perhaps I got that wrong, but if you can't transmit the disease when you are asymptomatic, what does it matter what you do until you show the first sign of a symptom?[/quote]voluntary quarantine means a patient saying "Hey I value what you are protecting". Breaking that simple assumption of local society can mean death were things in an extreme state. Why would one not value the community they sought to serve?

[RandallT]

Anyone know how common virus mutations are? From what I've gathered the DoD is being cautious because they are analyzing the possibility of the virus mutating to also be able to transmit through the air. So even if it's settled science now, they are considering the chance that facts now may not be the facts tomorrow. I'd be curious if there's precedent for a virus mutating enough to change its method of transmission.

[ilikefishes]

The Russians have been working for decades to try to make it a biological warfare weapon. It can't be transmitted easily and thus the reason it breaks it in places like it has.