Ebola outbreak - general thread #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Going back to the original case, Thomas Duncan. He was around Louise's family, daughters, and grandchildren in close contact for several days while running fever. Yet, not one of them have become sick. Also, most of them were around when the diarrhea started and with only one bathroom in the apartment, it must have been shared. Still, no one is sick.

I would think the scientists would be very interested in testing their blood to see what they could find. How this family escaped Ebola is a miracle. If Ebola is not contagious during the fever stage, that would be a big relief and something new to add to the facts.

With all the people Duncan was around while running fever and at his first hospital visit, why has some one not gotten sick? Betcha the CDC is not paying any attention to this as they are to busy digging themselves out of their daily messes! To me, with no medical training, I think it may be an important clue.

"At a 21 day quarantine period, using the data sets other than the Congo analysis of Chowell, three Congo data analyses, the probability of exceedance is between 1.9 and 12%. In other words from 0.1 to 12% of the time, an individual case will have a greater incubation time than 21 days."

http://currents.plos.org/outbreaks/article/on-the-quarantine-period-for-ebola-virus/

Hoping this isn't the case with Duncan's family and that they are truly out of the woods.
 
Good morning everyone. :seeya:

I have a very strong suspicion medical books are being updated as we speak. It appears that some new technologies and studies are proving some old findings to not actually be factual...
 
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-pers...ers-need-optimal-respiratory-protection-ebola

CIDRAP Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy
COMMENTARY: Health workers need optimal respiratory protection for Ebola
Filed Under: Ebola; VHF
Lisa M Brosseau, ScD, and Rachael Jones, PhD | Sep 17, 2014


Editor's Note: Today's commentary was submitted to CIDRAP by the authors, who are national experts on respiratory protection and infectious disease transmission. In May they published a similar commentary on MERS-CoV. Dr Brosseau is a Professor and Dr Jones an Assistant Professor in the School of Public Health, Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

How are infectious diseases transmitted via aerosols?
Medical and infection control professionals have relied for years on a paradigm for aerosol transmission of infectious diseases based on very outmoded research and an overly simplistic interpretation of the data. In the 1940s and 50s, William F. Wells and other "aerobiologists" employed now significantly out-of-date sampling methods (eg, settling plates) and very blunt analytic approaches (eg, cell culturing) to understand the movement of bacterial aerosols in healthcare and other settings. Their work, though groundbreaking at the time, provides a very incomplete picture.

Early aerobiologists were not able to measure small particles near an infectious person and thus assumed such particles existed only far from the source. They concluded that organisms capable of aerosol transmission (termed "airborne") can only do so at around 3 feet or more from the source. Because they thought that only larger particles would be present near the source, they believed people would be exposed only via large "droplets" on their face, eyes, or nose.

Modern research, using more sensitive instruments and analytic methods, has shown that aerosols emitted from the respiratory tract contain a wide distribution of particle sizes—including many that are small enough to be inhaled.5,6 Thus, both small and large particles will be present near an infectious person.

The chance of large droplets reaching the facial mucous membranes is quite small, as the nasal openings are small and shielded by their external and internal structure. Although close contact may permit large-droplet exposure, it also maximizes the possibility of aerosol inhalation.

As noted by early aerobiologists, liquid in a spray aerosol, such as that generated during coughing or sneezing, will quickly evaporate,7 which increases the concentration of small particles in the aerosol. Because evaporation occurs in milliseconds, many of these particles are likely to be found near the infectious person.

The current paradigm also assumes that only "small" particles (less than 5 micrometers [mcm]) can be inhaled and deposited in the respiratory tract. This is not true. Particles as large as 100 mcm (and perhaps even larger) can be inhaled into the mouth and nose. Larger particles are deposited in the nasal passages, pharynx, and upper regions of the lungs, while smaller particles are more likely to deposit in the lower, alveolar regions. And for many pathogens, infection is possible regardless of the particle size or deposition site.

It's time to abandon the old paradigm of three mutually exclusive transmission routes for a new one that considers the full range of particle sizes both near and far from a source. In addition, we need to factor in other important features of infectivity, such as the ability of a pathogen to remain viable in air at room temperature and humidity and the likelihood that systemic disease can result from deposition of infectious particles in the respiratory system or their transfer to the gastrointestinal tract.

We recommend using "aerosol transmissible" rather than the outmoded terms "droplet" or "airborne" to describe pathogens that can transmit disease via infectious particles suspended in air.

The potential for transmission via inhalation of aerosols, therefore, cannot be ruled out by the observed risk factors or our knowledge of the infection process. Many body fluids, such as vomit, diarrhea, blood, and saliva, are capable of creating inhalable aerosol particles in the immediate vicinity of an infected person. Cough was identified among some cases in a 1995 outbreak in Kikwit, Democratic Republic of the Congo,11 and coughs are known to emit viruses in respirable particles.17 The act of vomiting produces an aerosol and has been implicated in airborne transmission of gastrointestinal viruses.18,19 Regarding diarrhea, even when contained by toilets, toilet flushing emits a pathogen-laden aerosol that disperses in the air.20-22

Altogether, these epidemiologic and experimental data offer enough evidence to suggest that Ebola and other filoviruses may be opportunistic with respect to aerosol transmission.28 That is, other routes of entry may be more important and probable, but, given the right conditions, it is possible that transmission could also occur via aerosols.

Guidance from the CDC and WHO recommends the use of facemasks for healthcare workers providing routine care to patients with Ebola virus disease and respirators when aerosol-generating procedures are performed. (Interestingly, the 1998 WHO and CDC infection-control guidance for viral hemorrhagic fevers in Africa, still available on the CDC Web site, recommends the use of respirators.)

Facemasks, however, do not offer protection against inhalation of small infectious aerosols, because they lack adequate filters and do not fit tightly against the face.1 Therefore, a higher level of protection is necessary.
 
Federal health officials effectively acknowledged the problems with their procedures for protecting health care workers by abruptly changing them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/u...-poor-hospital-training-experts-say.html?_r=0

Some major hospitals, aware of the inadequacy of the older C.D.C. guidelines, have followed more stringent standards in training their staff. But many — including Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas, where two nurses were infected by a dying patient — have not.

The Doctors Without Borders guidelines are even stricter than the new C.D.C. directives in that they require full coverage of the torso, head and legs with fabrics that blood or vomit cannot soak through, along with rubber aprons, goggles or face shields, sealed wrists and rubber boots. Doctors and nurses wear two sets of gloves, including long outer ones that strap or are taped to the gown; janitors wear three sets.

more at link
 
I do find it remarkable that the people that shared space and took care of TD have not fallen ill. The reasons I have thought of are:
  1. The others have a natural immunity to this strain of ebola.
  2. The amount of virus secreted in the beginning stages 0-4 days is very minimal.
  3. The family was aware of his contact with the pregnant neighbor, suspected ebola, were watching for symptoms and immediately isolated TD. (This conflicts with was said by the family, but also explains some questionable comments/actions).
moo
 
If it is true that Louise's family has not gotten sick, I certainly hold there are scientists looking into the possibility of them having some kind of immunity, etc. Has there been any updates on her family at all in the past week? Do we know for sure that none of them has gotten sick?

Apparently there are a sizeable number of folks that DO have antibodies and have never actually been sick. Not sure if this is the same strain though....

A surprisingly high proportion of the Gabonese population could have immunity against Ebola. Antibodies to the virus were found in 15.3% of rural communities, whereas these people had never had haemorrhagic fever or other specific symptoms of the disease (such as severe diarrhoea or vomiting).

The scientists consider that these people have somehow come into contact with the virus, probably present in fruit contaminated by saliva from Chiroptera (fruit bats).

http://en.ird.fr/the-media-centre/scientific-newssheets/337-possible-natural-immunity-to-ebola
 
Hatfeild did I offend you? Hatfeild I hope I did not offend you- I was being funny! Sorry if it did so.

Sonia Good question. I would not report to them.The longer it goes , and that is what IMO should be reproted is it does seem that it has not infected anyone other than those who have had contact with fluids-IMO identical to HIV interms of transmsision modes
 
I totally agree. I wish some news place would ask them about this. I have not heard anything about this.

I totally agree that his family members seem to have some kind of immunity or antibodies.

I'm sure I have read somewhere that ebola is most contagious during the period close to death - or where the person is critically ill - and immediately after death. I'm afraid I can't find the exact source which states this.

If true, it would make sense as Duncan had close contact to a woman only hours before her death, and the nurses infected with ebola both in Spain and the US also had contact with ebola victims during the most critical phase, prior to death.
 
The highly respected Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota just advised the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) that “there is scientific and epidemiologic evidence that Ebola virus has the potential to be transmitted via infectious aerosol particles,” including exhaled breath.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/14/CIDRAP-Confirms-Ebola-Transmittable-by-Air
CIDRAP is warning that surgical facemasks do not prevent transmission of Ebola, and healthcare professionals (HCP) must immediately be outfitted with full-hooded protective gear and powered air-purifying respirators.

CIDRAP since 2001 has been a global leader in addressing public health preparedness regarding emerging infectious diseases and bio-security responses. CIDRAP’s opinion on Ebola virus is there are “No proven pre- or post-exposure treatment modalities;” “A high case-fatality rate;” and “Unclear modes of transmission.”
 
Hatfeild did I offend you? Hatfeild I hope I did not offend you- I was being funny! Sorry if it did so.

Sonia Good question. I would not report to them.The longer it goes , and that is what IMO should be reproted is it does seem that it has not infected anyone other than those who have had contact with fluids-IMO identical to HIV interms of transmsision modes

Hello Cariis. I was not offended as I realized your post was just friendly sarcasm. I tried to reply but my post got pulled for review.

Its good to see/hear from you again, as I have not visited the MH370 thread in a long time.
 
I totally agree. I wish some news place would ask them about this. I have not heard anything about this.

I totally agree that his family members seem to have some kind of immunity or antibodies.

I think the immunity possibility is interesting, too. But, remember, the people in close quarters with Duncan were LOUISE's family members..(or were the nephews HIS nephews?) JMO
 
Good morning everyone. :seeya:

I have a very strong suspicion medical books are being updated as we speak. It appears that some new technologies and studies are proving some old findings to not actually be factual...

Or not previously known, I hope.
 
Who Is the 'Clipboard Man' Without a Hazmat Suit?

"Our medical professionals in the biohazard suits have limited vision and mobility and it is the protocol supervisor’s job to watch each person carefully and give them verbal directions to insure no close contact protocols are violated," a spokesperson from Phoenix Air told ABC News said.

"There is absolutely no problem with this and in fact insures an even higher level of safety for all involved," the spokesperson said.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/clipboard-man-hazmat-suit/story?id=26235850


That explanation tells me that none of the people in the suits know what they are doing and clip board man has the directions. jmo idk

He did more than give verbal commands. He grabbed hold of the red contamination bag and held it open while they dumped things in and those things touched his hands. Why is everyone lying so much?
 
CDC Director Frieden on US Ebola Response (or lack thereof) live 12:00pm ET on C-Span
 
<modsnip>

We have to move forward now and take care of present problems. We can't let the cause be the focus.
 
Who Is the 'Clipboard Man' Without a Hazmat Suit?

"Our medical professionals in the biohazard suits have limited vision and mobility and it is the protocol supervisor’s job to watch each person carefully and give them verbal directions to insure no close contact protocols are violated," a spokesperson from Phoenix Air told ABC News said.

"There is absolutely no problem with this and in fact insures an even higher level of safety for all involved," the spokesperson said.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/clipboard-man-hazmat-suit/story?id=26235850


That explanation tells me that none of the people in the suits know what they are doing and clip board man has the directions.
jmo idk

OMG I just totally LOLd :giggle:

This situation does seem to boarder on absurd at times. MOO
 
Now that it is known that the virus is airborne, dou you think DPH needs to be sealed and decontaminated?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
126
Guests online
219
Total visitors
345

Forum statistics

Threads
609,151
Messages
18,250,162
Members
234,549
Latest member
raymehay
Back
Top