Slashdot Mirror
After Dallas Ebola Diagnosis, CDC Raises Estimate of Patient's Possible Contacts
As reported by Bloomberg News, The Washington Post, and other outlets, the Liberian patient whose diagnosis of Ebola infection marks him as the first such case to have been first diagnosed within the United States may have had contact with more people than previously estimated, and 80 people in the Dallas area are now
believed to have come into contact with him. While Bloomberg reports that this larger group of potential contacts is "being monitored for symptoms," the Washington Post's slightly later story says that, in keeping with the best current knowledge about Ebola's spread,
"Dallas County Health and Human Services Director Zachary Thompson said that these [newly identified contacts] are not being watched or monitored and are not showing any symptoms of the illness. Only the immediate family members of the victim are being regularly monitored for Ebola symptoms; they've been ordered to stay at home and avoid contact with others."
H1N1 was also a "real virus", whatever that means. The media is equally blowing American risk of Ebola out of proportion like they did H1N1, which actually managed to infect a largish number of Americans.
There were 14,000 worldwide deaths from H1N1 2k9, 3,500 of which were in North America. This ebola breakout doesn't currently represent nearly that much risk to Americans, but it could be a lot worse if the epidemic continues to grow in western Africa.
... The 'cures' being worked are anti-retrovirals that inhibit the viral replication,.
Your spot on except its plain anti-virals; ebola is not a retrovirus
1. Ebola is normally infectious Only through bodily fluids. This puts health workers more at risk. 2. It is also very sensitive to light, especially ultraviolet rays from direct sunlight, This relates back to #1 and is one reason it doesn't spread well once it gets in the atmosphere. This is stuff I learned from when I worked at the Centers for Disease control.
The (1st) missionary doctor that contracted Ebola because he was treating people in Africa is from Texas. Although he's feeling much better now.
He's been giving blood so that serum can be made from it.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Can you give us a cite?
If I understand correctly, while there have been about 150 doctors and nurses who have died from the disease, none of them were wearing protective suits. In fact, all of them were working in 2nd tier clinics. All of these clinics had poor to no infection controls in place. Nobody has died in a major hospital which had infection controls in place. This strain of Ebola is not airborne – yet.
Actually I think some of those were wearing some protective gear... but Africa is a hot climate. I was reading an article recently from a doctor there who commented how hot it gets in that gear, and you struggle even after an hour or two not to be wanting to 'wipe your brow' because of all the sweating you're doing in the suit (eyes, nose, mouth are vulnerable spots for contamination). And that was someone in the full-on "bunny suit" (totally sealed) - you can imagine the people who we've seen pictures of with only a 'riot helmet' face protection with a N95 mask under it and a Tyvek gown. And of course every time you walk out of the containment area you have to be disinfected...
Saying that something is more lethal doesn't mean the same as saying it kills more people.
Who are you to say which is more lethal? It seems to me that H1N1's better transmission methods make it the more effective, if less efficient, killer than Ebola. So far H1N1 has thus proven itself to be more lethal, though of course Ebola might catch up.
Lethal - "sufficient to cause death" or "capable of causing death" is a word with enough ambiguity in the definition to apply to either case. It does not exclusively mean "efficient at causing death once afflicted on someone" as you imply.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
So the government can force house arrest upon you against your will even though you've committed no crime? Land of the free, my ass. It's quite ironic that the average slashdot poster, who rushes to criticize government overreach and trampling of freedoms in the name of safety (how many times has Franklin's "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety..." been quoted here?--countless!) sees nothing wrong with this example OF THE VERY SAME FUCKING THING! Talk about hypocrisy! I'm sure I'll get BS replies about thresholds etc. from people that forget that fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of mobility, are supposedly inviolable.
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."