Ebola/ an update

David Morton

Lifetime Supporter
We have two first aider Ebola victims here in the UK fighting for their lives.

There have been reports of the virus affecting Islamic State fighters now.

In spite of some of our members trying to say Ebola is of no consequence in terms of the numbers affected, I think that is no longer a valid argument. This virus is spreading more and more rapidly and 7,000 deaths is the current figure.
Any comments ?
 

David Morton

Lifetime Supporter
Thanks for your input Randy. It's very alarming with the death rate increasing every day. I hope it will affect the Islamic State Jehaddists but I doubt it will have much effect in our favour. Isn't that an irony?
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
Sure it is an issue. THe question is how much?

More people will die in teh US of influenza in a WEEK than will die of Ebola EVER. So why the massive freak out?

1. Politics (in the US). The right wing claimed this was "Obama's Katrina" in that we were unprepared for it. I think the events of the last few weeks have proven that to be a complete fabrication.

2. The disease looks bad in unsanitary places like Africa. The reality is that in First World countries, transmission rates are much lower due to knowledge/information and the disease is far from as fatal as it is in other places.

All in all, it's an issue, but it is really an issue in Africa. Good friend in the US Army just returned from Liberia building treatment centers. He was there with troops from the UK and Spain, among others. Once again, our military (all of us here in Western nations) is doing a ton of humanitarian work under the radar, much as they did after the Indian Ocean tsunami, etc.
 

David Morton

Lifetime Supporter
The US CDC (Centre for Disease Control) has stated that 90% of influenza associated deaths occur among adults 65 years and older. The underlying problem is pre existing pulmonary and respiratory diseases. I really don't think that Flu in the USA is a good comparator. Try the Black Death.
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
In terms of numbers? I agree flu isn't a good comparison. Far more will die of the flu in a week than will EVER die of ebola in the UK or US. Ever.

I don't get the ebola freak out. It's not an unknown like AIDS. It's treatable and survival rates among Westerners receiving good care in Western hospitals is high. We also appear to be on teh downside of the R naught, with the number of cases in most African countries decreasing or disappearing altogether.

Concern? Yes. Ebola-freak out? Nope.
 

David Morton

Lifetime Supporter
PS. I'm not the sort of person to "freak out" but I really hate ignoring the facts , including both medical and security matters. I try to let everyone I know of security briefs as they become "unrestricted" and therefore titled as "Unclassified".
 
We have two first aider Ebola victims here in the UK fighting for their lives.

There have been reports of the virus affecting Islamic State fighters now.

In spite of some of our members trying to say Ebola is of no consequence in terms of the numbers affected, I think that is no longer a valid argument. This virus is spreading more and more rapidly and 7,000 deaths is the current figure.
Any comments ?

Which is really the crux of the matter, cures and vaccine`s are no doubt on the horizon but until then containment should be of paramount urgency and implementation.

Bob
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
I agree with you Jeff, but its a major source of fund drain for each of our countries at a time none of us needed it. Those affected and those about to be infected are ignoring the medics on the ground in Sierra Leone and adjacent countries and keeping their dead relatives by hiding them.
Another piece of info from CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/pdf/infections-spread-by-air-or-droplets.pdf

Agree here as well. The biggest part of the problem is that African countries are not able to implement, for social and societal reasons as you indicate in many cases, adequate anti-transmission practices.
 
Back
Top