outbreak! (ebola, sars, coronavirus, etc)

Not this time. It has been a factor in the past but bats are more dangerous and thought to be the source of this outbreak.

would ebola even be a thing without september 2014 being the hottest september on record?

i heard pieces about 'bush meat' on NPR for sure

― festival culture (Jordan), Friday, October 17, 2014 4:21 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

preparation/consumption of bushmeat is absolutely contributing to the epidemic and has been reported widely in the peer-reviewed literature. i'm not sure what you're referring to but saying that this/distrust of health authorities/burial practices are some sort of right wing BS is incorrect

the article was criticizing the media playing up those things, as oppose to the dire absence of a health-care infrastructure, as being the major cause of the out-of-control ebola epidemic in west africa

causeS

lots of interesting writing about that here:

http://www.culanth.org/fieldsights/585-ebola-in-perspective

the outbreak in the Congo, which is being caused by a genetically distinct strain, was traced back to the preparation of bushmeat, for example

right, but as many have pointed out, outbreaks are one thing, global or even regional epidemics quite another

you'd expect periodic outbreaks wherever humans might come into contact with disease animals (or their carcasses, or dung, or food), but for a pandemic to begin there has to be a real inability to combat the spread of the virus.

sorry for not reading other posts between mine, on my phone

Pentagon parking lot puker not ebola positive.

Don't get a hangover in dc. End up in quarantine.

yeah, it appears this is going to destroy the Democrats in 2 weeks

bushmeat sarcasm quotes

ugh
just found out that the bridal shop amber vinson went to is equidistant in the other direction from my parents house as the insane vasectomy cult

ernest angley vasectomy cult -----about 1.5 mi------- my parents' house ------about 1.5 mi-------- ebola bridal shop

wtf akron area

holy shit at the ernest angley church/cult. First I'm hearing about this. What the fuck indeed.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/24/doctor-tests-positive-for-ebola-at-new-york-hospital?CMP=twt_gu

yeah, this is gonna make life in the city that much more paranoid for awhile.

Who bowled in Williamsburg last night?

momus

Imagine if he'd been hospitalized on a Monday after going to brunch

lol

Around the time that Spencer decided to go to West Africa, it seemed that the world was finally getting involved. In mid-September, the United States, joined by several other countries, pledged more than $175 million to the fight and 3,000 troops. Days after that announcement, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed an “unprecedented resolution” calling for $1 billion (and an additional $570 million on behalf of WHO) from world leaders in order to send the people and supplies necessary to contain the epidemic.

Ten days later, when the dust had settled, MSF President Joanne Liu called their bluff. “Generous pledges of aid and unprecedented UN resolutions are very welcome. But they will mean little, unless they are translated into immediate action,” Liu said. “The reality on the ground today is this: The promised surge has not yet delivered.” As of Oct. 17, over a month after the plans were set, the UN has only collected 38 percent of its goal.

MSF, the first humanitarian organization to recognize the epidemic, has been waiting for help to come since March. According to a spokesperson, the organization employs 270 international and around 3,018 locally hired staff in the three affected countries: Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. Among those nations is a population of 22 million. Some heroic volunteers, like Spencer, have joined the fight—but not enough. “The sick are desperate, their families and caregivers are angry, and aid workers are exhausted,” Liu continued at the meeting. “Maintaining quality of care is an extreme challenge.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/23/why-new-york-s-ebola-case-will-hurt-infected-patients-everywhere.html

http://www.theawl.com/2014/10/checking-in-with-the-ebola-day-traders

Paul Farmer article so good! God, I love him.

I work at one of the biggest hospitals in Boston and the prep going on here is really impressive and extensive but I guess now they're pre-screening every single patient both when they make their appointments and upon arrival which seems both excessive and smart. The IDX dept is right above ours and people keep making jokes about how they're always using our bathroom. ._. For someone with pretty extreme anxiety I'm surprised I'm not more (at all?) worried about this.

yeah same; i read a good thing at the times (on their well blog) about the specifics of transmission, which my medically-untrained mind had got kinda spooked out about, generally just thinking transmission-by-sweat & flu-symptom'ed-patients-on-major-city-transit were a terrifying combo. & it got into how viral loads in any of the more immediately encounterable fluids were just too small to be a concern. it is totally a fascinating & terrifying thing to think about but it's nice being back in a kind of raised eyebrow state wrt the hysteria.

Yeah, I guess one of the reasons I haven't been worried is that I do know a very small about about medical stuff including how transmissible certain things are and how Ebola in particular works. Also, I've never seen Outbreak which I'm guessing is a good thing right now. ;)

It upsets me how much the phrase "viral loads" crosses my mind these days

so did Ebola's CMJ set get rescheduled or what

was it at Brooklyn Bowl?

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119969/new-york-city-ebola-case-why-did-dr-craig-spencer-go-bowling

irresponsible ignorant media bullshit, take 8472673

Christie, Cuomo inform the feds that they will be doing airport arrival quarantines

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/25/nyregion/new-york-ebola-case-craig-spencer.html

I hope the soundbites of Andy Cuomo now heard around the country are impressing you all with what a pompous dick he is.

"Quarantine means go home, stay home for 21 days.... that's quarantine. But I want to go out for pizza. Really, you can't. Well, I wanna go on one date. Well, really, you can't. That's why they call it quarantine," he said.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/cuomo-christie-announce-mandatory-quarantine-some-returning-travelers/

this is really stupid. there's no medical reason to quarantine people who don't have symptoms. and all this is going to do is 1) discourage people from volunteering and 2) encourage people to lie about their histories

they are both running for something, tho

there's no medical reason to quarantine people who don't have symptoms.

In the case of ebola, where contact with body fluids is required for transmission, the likelihood of transmission just by walking around in public would seem to be extremely low prior to noticeable symptoms. But, really, there has been so little experience with this disease prior to the latest outbreak, that categorical statements about it are a bit premature.

thanks aimless, please send an email to the physicians who make these recommendations and let them know

One problem I see is that someone can become symptomatic while out -- do you really trust yourself to recognize the moment you first have a 100.4 fever? Because that doesn't always feel like much. This isn't the flu but it's not HIV either, i.e. it can spread through ordinary personal contact via bodily fluids. So I don't think it's so crazy for a doctor who has been treating Ebola patients to have a 3-week quarantine. Why are you so against taking that relatively minor precaution?

Also I don't buy that this will "discourage people from volunteering" or "encourage people to lie" -- you really think a doctor willing to treat Ebola patients is going to change his mind because he might have to hang around his apartment for a few weeks after?

the hysteria is understandable but elected officials ideally should defer to the people who know what they're talking about. tho as morbs pointed out there are some political calculations obviously

One problem I see is that someone can become symptomatic while out -- do you really trust yourself to recognize the moment you first have a 100.4 fever? Because that doesn't always feel like much. This isn't the flu but it's not HIV either, i.e. it can spread through ordinary personal contact via bodily fluids. So I don't think it's so crazy for a doctor who has been treating Ebola patients to have a 3-week quarantine. Why are you so against taking that relatively minor precaution?

Also I don't buy that this will "discourage people from volunteering" or "encourage people to lie" -- you really think a doctor willing to treat Ebola patients is going to change his mind because he might have to hang around his apartment for a few weeks after?

― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Saturday, October 25, 2014 3:49 PM (40 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

someone returning from an area where Ebola exists, even someone caring for ebola patients (who btw is a doctor and has presumably followed the safety protocols) isn't necessarily presumed to have ebola. there is a very well-accepted consensus, based on the best medical evidence available, that ebola can only be transmitted while a person is symptomatic (and having a low-grade fever represents the low end of that continuum; contagiousness increases as the person gets sicker), and even IF the person is symptomatic, it can only be transmitted through exchange of bodily fluids. not by being breathed on, or touching a subway rail, or by shaking hands. professionals who have returned from working with people with ebola are instructed to monitor their temperatures often and report to the authorities at the first sign of symptoms. the risk to someone without intimate contact with an asymtomatic person incubating ebola is essentially zero. not "small" but essentially negligible. and again, it is understandable that laypeople with a poor understanding of the disease are worried, but that doesn't mean policy shouldn't be evidence-based. it also underscores the need for effective public health messaging, which cuomo has now totally fucked up.

requiring that volunteers, who already are too few, spend 3 weeks after returning unable to work or live their lives, in the absence of evidence that this is even remotely necessary, could certainly dissuade them from going over and contributing to the effort where they're most desperately needed. additionally it's well-accepted in public health circles that mandatory disclosures of this sort (see also disclosing HIV status, etc) may have the paradoxical effect of causing people to lie about their histories, making epidemiological work even harder.

anyway hope that's coherent i'm on my phone

public distrust in medical authorities has already played a devastating enough role in the spread in africa. having the city health commissioner, the mayor, the CDC director, and the governor all present different messages based on their particular political priorities is a recipe for disaster, or at best, needless paranoia

really good & illuminating & more than coherent posts ^^^, ty k3vin

speaking of which: After Negative Ebola Test, Quarantined Nurse Criticizes Treatment at Newark Airport

Every unnecessary precaution made by officials validates public fear, which in turn creates more desire for more unnecessary precautions. It's a dangerous cycle, the avoidance of which is one of the most important jobs of leaders when dealing with public health events like this.

well said

i went to the doctor the other day for an ear infection and they asked me the standard pre-screening questions. have you been overseas? have you had any contact with anyone who was recently in west africa? etc. and i live in a midwestern town that's so far been unaffected.

kev k., thanks for the sarcasm. before your reply my life was missing something, but I didn't know what it was.

The experts you place such reliance upon can only work from the data they have. Based on their data of how the virus has behaved in the past they predict how it will behave in the future and recommend precautions that ought to be adequate. That is as far as science can take them.

The problem I was pointing out is not a problem with scientific method or with reasonable interpretations of the available data. The problem is more fundamental. It is how little data they are working from. It's hard to capture outriders when you lack data points. Factors that result in the transmission of the disease on average once in a thousand instances won't emerge from statistical noise when you only have a couple of thousand instances to examine. In a place like NY city, an asymptomatic infected person can easily have casual contact with enough people that a 1 in 1000 transmission might occur.

I suspect that if you spoke directly to the public health officials most intimately informed about ebola, they would be qualifying their statements about the behavior of the disease in ways that are not reflected in statements made to the general public, precisely for the reasons nick said and you approved:

"avoidance of [public fear] is one of the most important jobs of leaders when dealing with public health events like this."

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/10/27/nyregion/ebola-quarantine.html?referrer=

public administration at its finest

smfh

“We’ve taken this action and I have absolutely no second thoughts about it,”

What a thing to be proud of. Good luck usa.