The Ebola Virus

[lovetravellingoz]

it is stupid to say it can't be acquired through inhalation into the lungs in the face of so many cases of infection being acquired by medical personnel wearing protective gear. .

I am certainly no medical person, but you seem to be drawing a long bow with that statement. For example it appears that with the recent US health workers they were not issued with suitable protective clothing.

Do you have any actual examples of where it was air born, or at least where the health worker is known to have not breeched procedures?

 

[amaroo]

All very sobering….. just a little upgrade in the capabilities of the virus and we are all toast…….Nero fiddled while Rome burned…...

Spanish flu knocked off 20-50 million ..... these things happen.

at least 50 million people are thought to have died, with unusually high numbers of deaths in young and healthy people aged 15 to 35 years. It has been estimated that about 25 per cent of the world’s population was infected. Global spread and severity were influenced by the war and the movement of troops.

The Spanish flu did not reach Australia until 1919, partly because of strict maritime quarantine implemented by the government. It began in Victoria, spread to New South Wales then to the rest of Australia. By the end of 1919 (when the Australian population was just over 5 million), around 10,000 Australians, mostly young adults, had died of influenza. As in other countries, health services in Australia were greatly stretched during this time

 

[vetrade]

I am certainly no medical person, but you seem to be drawing a long bow with that statement. For example it appears that with the recent US health workers they were not issued with suitable protective clothing.

Do you have amy actual examples of where it was air born, or at least where the health worker is known to have not breeched procedures?

No, not drawing a long bow at all, lovetravellingoz. Early in my career I worked on disease eradication programs so I like to think I have a a working knowledge of the relevant considerations. Certainly I think too many people thought they knew far more about Ebola than what they actually did (i.e. they assumed too much) and as as result they have seriously underestimated the disease. If people are honest I think they would agree that this latest outbreak was probably expected to last a few weeks and then fade away as previous outbreaks have. Instead it is increasing in momentum so it's time people started to re-assess all the assumptions made to date because it is only a truly dumb scientist that doesn't rethink their whole approach when the results don't accord with what was expected. There's that saying that only stupid people keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. And I think it's extremely disingenuous that infected medical staff are assumed to have broken protocol. Personally I'd bet the people who have to treat infected Ebola patients are so aware of the risks that they would be doing everything humanly possible to protect themselves.

If we are to believe the "experts" the chances of getting the infection are supposedly negligible for the general public even without any protective clothing and yet infection rates in medical personnel taking all the precautions and wearing head to toe protective suits are high. Those two scenarios are just not logically compatible and I believe the general public is at far greater risk than they are being led to believe. Authorities would be naive to think their medical people have all breached procedures when the far more logical explanation is that people are becoming infected through inhalation or through contact with contaminated surfaces such as taps, seats, toilets, hand rails on buses, plates and cutlery etc, etc, etc.

 

[CaptBob]

If I knew the aircraft I was to board had been in Africa, I would probably elect to cancel. Why take the chance ?? Too many unknown with this strain of Ebola. I hear nothing from the airlines as to decontamination of equipment and public areas.
This virus is not flying out of Africa on its own, the aviation community is the major conduit. Time to take a stand ??

 

[PLANT]

That home made hazmat suit..... I think I'll make em AFF when they going on sale here?.... Now that's one way to get you tube views.... Wonder if for comedy sketch?

 

[moa999]

While not wanting to downplay the risk of ebola breakout.

This puts some perspective on it:

 

[lovetravellingoz]

. And I think it's extremely disingenuous that infected medical staff are assumed to have broken protocol. Personally I'd bet the people who have to treat infected Ebola patients are so aware of the risks that they would be doing everything humanly possible to protect themselves.
.

Again I am no medical person, but the reporting on the recent USA infections such as
Nurses at Dallas hospital describe poor safety measures with Ebola victim - LA Times

would seem to indicate to me that adequate procedures were not followed. This included, but was not limited to inadequate clothing. I would add here that the nurse was most likely following her hospital's protocols, but that those protocols would appear to have not been appropriate and or adequate. It would seem to me more likely that transmission was in a conventional way, rather than being air borne. And air borne if by the coughing mechanism with large droplets, I assume that this would only be possible if the health care worker was not dressed in appropriate clothing including face masks.

For example why was someone reporting fever symptoms not asked where they have travelled recently? And if quizzed on that and the ebola zone was revealed, why was not the original patient quarantined immediately.


PS : To also make it clear I am not implying in any way that the current ebola outbreak is not serious, or does not require immediate extra effrt to control it.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Again I will stress that I am not a medical person in any way. Though I am a traveller who does not follow the herd (ie I had a great time backpacking for 10 weeks in the Middle East with my three daughters then aged 11, 9 and 6 the Xmas after 9/11 much to the shock of anyone that I told prior that I saw no reason to not still travel).

WHO | What we know about transmission of the Ebola virus among humans


snopes.com: Is Ebola Now Airborne?

Not an airborne virus

Ebola virus disease is not an airborne infection. Airborne spread among humans implies inhalation of an infectious dose of virus from a suspended cloud of small dried droplets.
This mode of transmission has not been observed during extensive studies of the Ebola virus over several decades.
Common sense and observation tell us that spread of the virus via coughing or sneezing is rare, if it happens at all. Epidemiological data emerging from the outbreak are not consistent with the pattern of spread seen with airborne viruses, like those that cause measles and chickenpox, or the airborne bacterium that causes tuberculosis.
Theoretically, wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual, who has respiratory symptoms caused by other conditions or who vomits violently, could transmit the virus – over a short distance – to another nearby person.
This could happen when virus-laden heavy droplets are directly propelled, by coughing or sneezing (which does not mean airborne transmission) onto the mucus membranes or skin with cuts or abrasions of another person.
WHO is not aware of any studies that actually document this mode of transmission. On the contrary, good quality studies from previous Ebola outbreaks show that all cases were infected by direct close contact with symptomatic patients.

 

[amaroo]

While not wanting to downplay the risk of ebola breakout.

This puts some perspective on it:

View attachment 36307

Gets my vote for the best post in this thread....

 

[lovetravellingoz]

I would also just like to state that I have nothing but the highest admiration for medical staff who put themselves "in harms way".

 

[RAM]

A woman in the USA has been snapped at Dulles International Airport outside Washington DC earlier this week in a home made hazmat suit.

Picture of woman in home-made Hazmat suit goes viral

Passenger Wears A Hazmat Suit To Dulles Airport [PHOTO] | The Daily Caller
​

Are you certain that wasn't an AFFer?

 

[Pushka]

You can't catch HIV from skin contact. Nor does it carry the same fatality rate.

 

[vetrade]

Not an airborne virus

Ebola virus disease is not an airborne infection. Airborne spread among humans implies inhalation of an infectious dose of virus from a suspended cloud of small dried droplets.
This mode of transmission has not been observed during extensive studies of the Ebola virus over several decades.
Common sense and observation tell us that spread of the virus via coughing or sneezing is rare, if it happens at all. Epidemiological data emerging from the outbreak are not consistent with the pattern of spread seen with airborne viruses, like those that cause measles and chickenpox, or the airborne bacterium that causes tuberculosis.
Theoretically, wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual, who has respiratory symptoms caused by other conditions or who vomits violently, could transmit the virus – over a short distance – to another nearby person.
This could happen when virus-laden heavy droplets are directly propelled, by coughing or sneezing (which does not mean airborne transmission) onto the mucus membranes or skin with cuts or abrasions of another person.
WHO is not aware of any studies that actually document this mode of transmission. On the contrary, good quality studies from previous Ebola outbreaks show that all cases were infected by direct close contact with symptomatic patients.

There are more holes in that excerpt than a sieve. Wet or dry droplets ? - please spare me from the pedantics of such statements relying on strict definitions. Clearly there is significant overlap (transition) between the two and if I'm on a plane or bus I don't want either wet or dry droplets anywhere in the air around me. The last line is most telling: "On the contrary, good quality studies from PREVIOUS Ebola outbreaks............" As I have previously stated, this outbreak is not like previous ones. Previously satisfactory measures are not being effective now so it's time the people setting the agenda looked at the problem with fresh (and open) eyes. This simple fact suggests that the people setting policy on this are underestimating the virus. Reliance on previous studies, no matter how good they were, in the face of an evolving disease pattern is not good science - it is dumb science. In fact it reduces scientific principles to the level of religion or economics.

Edit: Here's an excerpt detailing serious errors by the WHO from their own report is this morning's papers: "Nearly everyone involved in the outbreak response failed to see some fairly plain writing on the wall". That's WHO-speak for "We screwed this up at every level from the start"!! Under the circumstances I'll take their pontifications about wet and dry droplets with a truck load of salt.

 

[drron]

The disease is basically limited to Guinea,Liberia and Sierra leone according to the WHO.
There were a few cases in Senegal and Nigeria but no new cases in about a month.
There is a separate outbreak of Ebola in the DRC.
WHO report-
WHO Response to the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) Outbreak - 20 September 2014 - WHO | Regional Office for Africa

The WHO though has been criticised for being too slow to react to this outbreak-
BBC News - Ebola crisis: WHO accused of 'failure' in early response

 

[medhead]

There are more holes in that excerpt than a sieve. Wet or dry droplets ? - please spare me from the pedantics of such statements relying on strict definitions. Clearly there is significant overlap (transition) between the two and if I'm on a plane or bus I don't want either wet or dry droplets anywhere in the air around me. The last line is most telling: "On the contrary, good quality studies from PREVIOUS Ebola outbreaks............" As I have previously stated, this outbreak is not like previous ones. Previously satisfactory measures are not being effective now so it's time the people setting the agenda looked at the problem with fresh (and open) eyes. This simple fact suggests that the people setting policy on this are underestimating the virus. Reliance on previous studies, no matter how good they were, in the face of an evolving disease pattern is not good science - it is dumb science. In fact it reduces scientific principles to the level of religion or economics.

Edit: Here's an excerpt detailing serious errors by the WHO from their own report is this morning's papers: "Nearly everyone involved in the outbreak response failed to see some fairly plain writing on the wall". That's WHO-speak for "We screwed this up at every level from the start"!! Under the circumstances I'll take their pontifications about wet and dry droplets with a truck load of salt.

What you clearly fail to approximate is that wet transmission even if inhaled is actually exchange of body fluids. It is well known that the virus lives in bodily fluids, so that someone inhaling, ingesting or injecting those bodily fluids have a very good chance to get infection.

On the other hand, a bodily fluid that lands on a surface and then dries in which the virus remains alive is vastly more difficult. Inhalation of dried, resuspended bodily fluid is very different to breathing in someone's sneeze. If the virus lived in that dried material a much greater risk is created.

You might see this as pedantics, but that is the strict definition. This is much better than just making something up that is out of step with the rest of the world. For a start your way means we can't even determine the appropriate PPE required.

 

[straitman]

Just to add to the mix of information.

Ebola Believed To Be Potentially Airborne, Researchers Claim

Editor’s note: this story has been amended to reflect that the primary source was submitted to and published by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy; the research and findings reflected did not originate with CIDRAP and should not be attributed to CIDRAP.

Ebola may have the potential to be airborne, according to a September commentary submitted to the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota. The authors believe “scientific and epidemiologic evidence that Ebola virus has the potential to be transmitted via infectious aerosol particles both near and at a distance from infected patients.”

The scientists behind the report warn that surgical facemasks will not prevent the transmission of Ebola. According to the report, medical workers must immediately be given full-hooded protective gear and powered air-purifying respirators.

An excerpt from the report — submitted to CIDRAP by the authors, “who are national experts on respiratory protection and infectious disease transmission” — reads, “Healthcare workers play a very important role in the successful containment of outbreaks of infectious diseases like Ebola. The correct type and level of personal protective equipment (PPE) ensures that healthcare workers remain healthy throughout an outbreak—and with the current rapidly expanding Ebola outbreak in West Africa, it’s imperative to favor more conservative measures.”

Read more at Ebola Believed To Be Potentially Airborne, Researchers Claim

 

[vetrade]

Medhead, you have (perhaps unintentionally) confirmed what has been my position from the start of this outbreak - which is that it has been misleading all along for authorities to peddle the line that the public would be safe from infection as long as they did not come in close direct physical contact with an infected person. It was clear that the intent was to have people believe that they could not get infected from close proximate exposure (i.e. inhalation) - a proposition that is patently incorrect, as you have conceded.

Fomites have also been dismissed all along as a possible source of infection yet it is highly conceivable that many scenarios could lead to just such a transmission. For example, in a plane a very feasible possible scenario would be the case of an infected person heading to the toilet and along the way they sneeze - contaminating seat armrests or even the tap handle in the toilet with WET droplets. Then unsuspecting Joe Blow comes along soon after (and before the droplets have dried) and puts his hand on the armrest or uses the tap before wiping his mouth or washing his face, thereby transferring the still very contagious virus to himself. Poor Joe probably hasn't even seen the infected person and has no reason to suspect he has been exposed because the official statements have been focused on not panicking people rather that giving the explicit, detailed info with which he would have been properly informed.

None of this is "....making something up that is out of step with the rest of the world" - if a strict definition has mislead people (either inadvertently or deliberately) then those responsible should be held to account. Do you really think Mr or Mrs Public has any concept of the pedantic distinction between wet and dry droplets? And how does my "way" (whatever that supposedly is) compromise the determination of PPE requirements? At most it merely confirms that the authorities have mismanaged this problem (as per their own admission) and don't know anywhere as much about how this virus behaves under various conditions to be able to implement a fail-safe PPE protocol themselves.

 

[vetrade]

Just to add to the mix of information.

Ebola Believed To Be Potentially Airborne, Researchers Claim

Editor’s note: this story has been amended to reflect that the primary source was submitted to and published by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy; the research and findings reflected did not originate with CIDRAP and should not be attributed to CIDRAP.

Ebola may have the potential to be airborne, according to a September commentary submitted to the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota. The authors believe “scientific and epidemiologic evidence that Ebola virus has the potential to be transmitted via infectious aerosol particles both near and at a distance from infected patients.”

The scientists behind the report warn that surgical facemasks will not prevent the transmission of Ebola. According to the report, medical workers must immediately be given full-hooded protective gear and powered air-purifying respirators.

An excerpt from the report — submitted to CIDRAP by the authors, “who are national experts on respiratory protection and infectious disease transmission” — reads, “Healthcare workers play a very important role in the successful containment of outbreaks of infectious diseases like Ebola. The correct type and level of personal protective equipment (PPE) ensures that healthcare workers remain healthy throughout an outbreak—and with the current rapidly expanding Ebola outbreak in West Africa, it’s imperative to favor more conservative measures.”

Read more at Ebola Believed To Be Potentially Airborne, Researchers Claim

At last, maybe some common sense will finally prevail and all the "desk jockeys" will extract their heads from their backside.

 

[juddles]

......For example, in a plane a very feasible possible scenario would be the case of an infected person heading to the toilet and along the way they sneeze......

If that were true we would have thousands of non-african cases already. Nice theorizing, but not mirrored by reality.

 

[juddles]

The non-african cases are healthworkers directly touching/treating ebola carriers.