Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

WHO Declares Ebola Outbreak An International Emergency

Posted by Unknown on from the we're-all-gonna-die dept.

mdsolar (1045926) writes with news that, with the Ebola outbreak growing out of control, the WHO has declared an international health emergency. From the article: With cases rapidly mounting in four West African countries, the World Health Organization (WHO) today declared the Ebola outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), a designation that allows the agency to issue recommendations for travel restrictions but also sends a strong message that more resources need to be mobilized to bring the viral disease under control. ... This is only the third time the health agency has issued a PHEIC declaration since the new International Health Regulations (IHR), a global agreement on the control of diseases, were adopted in 2005. The previous two instances were in 2009, for the H1N1 influenza pandemic, and in May for the resurgence of polio.

6 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Re:First.... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I like preppers, they rarely, if ever, actually understand the consequences of social collapse, and falsely view increased individualism as the primary consequence of major institutional failure.

    They don't consider the social structures that arise in post-governmental situations. The importance of community connectivity increases with importance as rigid social structures fail. You want a local warlord, a gang, a tribe, or some other primitive power structure, if you want to survive in a "lawless" world.

  2. keep calm everyone.... by ganjadude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ebola, while a horrible deadly disease is not the doom and gloom its being made out to be for anyone not living in a 3rd world country., and even for those living in 3rd world countries for that matter. more people die in 1 month from the flu in africa (over 5 K from the last article i saw ) than they die from ebola last year. to put it in prospective, less than 1000 people died from it last year.

    Unless you are literally playing in a sick persons bodily fluids, the risk is almost 0

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    1. Re:keep calm everyone.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They haven't ingrained with germ theory since they were toddlers. Their funeral rites often include hand-washing and kissing the deceased.

    2. Re:keep calm everyone.... by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

      Unless you are literally playing in a sick persons bodily fluids, the risk is almost 0

      As I said last time this topic came up, the fear is not that Ebola will spread by people playing in each others' bodily fluids. The fear is that it'll spread beyond a containment zone in Africa, then mutate into a form which can be spread through the air. That's what happens to the various strains of flu. It usually starts off in a form which jumps from animals to man via direct contact. That limits it to farmers and people who work directly with animals (e.g. butchers, cooks in restaurants). But then mutates into a form which spreads easily via the air, which is when it becomes a pandemic.

      Of course Ebola is very different from the flu. It may be very difficult or impossible for Ebola to mutate into a form which can survive long enough in water droplets that sick people cough/sneeze into the air. But we don't know that. Given how deadly the disease is (50%-90% fatality rate, vs about 15% for the Spanish Flu that killed more people than WWI), it's a stupid assumption to make. That's why the international health agencies are assuming the worst-case and handling it as if it was going to mutate into something communicable via the air.

  3. Plague, Inc. by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 5, Funny

    Am I the only one who views these things differently after playing a few hours of Plague, Inc?

  4. Re:First.... by shadowrat · · Score: 5, Funny

    I like preppers, they rarely, if ever, actually understand the consequences of social collapse, and falsely view increased individualism as the primary consequence of major institutional failure.

    They don't consider the social structures that arise in post-governmental situations. The importance of community connectivity increases with importance as rigid social structures fail. You want a local warlord, a gang, a tribe, or some other primitive power structure, if you want to survive in a "lawless" world.

    Oh sure, grouping up provides an immediate boost to strength, but It'll only last for so long. This australian case study from 1985 http://tinyurl.com/h4otx proved that such a social structure is only as strong as it's weakest link. A stronger individual will always appear in time and take your group apart. It's pretty much proven as the same results were witnessed in 2 previous studies. I hear they are going to run it again. I expect the same outcome.

    Heres a similar sociological study demonstrating the feasibility of individual survival. It's not as targeted at catastrophic social collapse, but i think it's safe to extrapolate. http://tinyurl.com/3xpd3n