from the iBola-launch-expected-at-next-WWDC dept.
Last week, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that the number of cases could ultimately exceed 20,000.
Science Mag is reporting that mathematical disease modelers around the world say this estimate is too conservative. Some claim by a factor of 5, over the next 3 months.
To a mathematician, combating any outbreak is at its core a fight to reduce one number: "Re", the pathogen’s effective reproductive rate, the number of people that an infected person in turn infects on average. An Re above 1, and the disease spreads. Below 1, an outbreak will stall.
The estimates of Re varies by country, in Guinea and Sierra Leone, Re is thought to be close to 1 and the outbreak could be stopped if interventions improve a bit. In Liberia, Re has been near 1.5 the whole time.
Poor data is hampering the modelers, with up to three-quarters of Ebola cases going unreported, there is no reason to believe the actual situation is any better in Sierra Leone. There is still only partial belief that Ebola is real by many villagers, and they continue to bury their dead in traditional ways
Another part of the problem is poor disease progression data. Currently, there is no actual data on the incubation period for this particular strain of Ebola, and modelers are forced to use 21 days, which was determined from prior outbreaks. However recent genetic studies indicating the current strain is significantly different than past strains with over 300 genetic changes.
“We have never had this kind of experience with Ebola before,” David Nabarro, coordinator of the new U.N. Ebola effort, said as he toured Freetown last week. “When it gets into the cities, then it takes on another dimension.”
Related Stories
A CDC press release confirms what has already been reported in other sources. The Liberian man became ill four days after arriving in the US, and sought medical help two days later. He was sent home, but returned to hospital two days later and was admitted. Hopefully Ebola's ability to spread through the air remains limited.
Notwithstanding the BBC report, the CDC report states:
The data health officials have seen in the past few decades since Ebola was discovered indicate that it is not spread through casual contact or through the air. Ebola is spread through direct contact with bodily fluids of a sick person or exposure to objects such as needles that have been contaminated. The illness has an average 8-10 day incubation period (although it ranges from 2 to 21 days); CDC recommends monitoring exposed people for symptoms a complete 21 days. People are not contagious after exposure unless they develop symptoms.
See our earlier stories: How Ebola Blocks Immune System, Second Ebola Outbreak in DRC Unrelated to First, and Ebola Disease Modelers: 100K by December.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Joe on Monday September 08 2014, @02:20AM
Your kid has diarrhea and is vomiting - could be a hundred different things, including Ebola. Your kid needs supportive care and the doctors are asking if there was any chance of exposure to the virus.
1. Tell the truth: your child gets sent to the Ebola isolation ward - risking infection with a dangerous virus that the kid might not have.
2. Lie: your kid gets better care and is not surrounded by people who have a 50% chance of dying from an infectious disease.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tynin on Monday September 08 2014, @02:31AM
It would truly be a horrifying experience to have to deal with. Further, when you hear that even the rich western doctors are getting the disease, it might make you further question seeing someone that comes into repeated contact with those with the plague.
(Score: 0) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday September 08 2014, @02:44AM
Meh. I consider that there are 2 possibilities to the current Ebola situation, from a Westerner's perspective:
Or maybe they're trying to bury upcoming Snowden leaks with all the noise, who knows. Anyway, as an American, I'm not going to worry about it until they start quarantines and throwing people into FEMA camps and shit.
(Score: 2) by hankwang on Monday September 08 2014, @03:48AM
"2 possibilities to the current Ebola situation, from a Westerner's perspective: a sensational fearmongering distraction ... a deliberately-engineered strain"
Are you, as a Westerner, seriously stating that these are the only possibilities?
Avantslash: SoylentNews for mobile [avantslash.org]
(Score: 0) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday September 08 2014, @05:35AM
I'm saying sensational because I remember what a farce the domestic Swine Flu scare was -- and at the time I was in an agricultural area with lots of swine as well as other animals.
I'm also saying is that the timing and circumstances of this latest Ebola outbreak are suspicious. We've known about Ebola for a long time, Ebola's been there a long time, and now all of a sudden there's this new strain genetically different from what's always been there and the rest of the world is only giving a shit now just as all this other tensiony shit is happening geopolitically across the planet.
No, those two possibilities aren't the only ones. But I at the same time I am skeptical of the official narrative.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by hankwang on Monday September 08 2014, @06:33AM
Swine flu is called like that because it is a virus strain that has origins in a pig flu strain, not because pigs are relevant as an infection source for humans. Where I live (Netherlands), this was stated repeatedly in the media, back in 2009. See also 2009 flu pandemic actions concerning pigs [wikipedia.org] on Wikipedia.
I suspect that there have not been many occasions in the last 10 years where you couldn't have used this argument, which would make any epidemic suspect in your eyes.
Avantslash: SoylentNews for mobile [avantslash.org]
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday September 08 2014, @12:30PM
Nevertheless, the swine flu scare was a farce. Remember everyone ripping their hair out on the news, the panicked development of a 'vaccine' that turned out to be ineffective? The media had people believing it was going to be spanish flu part 2. Then there was the billions spent on tamiflue (the effectiveness of which is now seriously questioned) which is now useless due to limited shelf life. Then the whole thing turned out to be a flop anyway.
The initial reports WERE legitimately worrying, but within a week it was clear that the statistics were regressing to the mean and that it really wasn't any worse than any other strain of flu. Alas, the scare machine was already cranked up to maximum and nobody was going to let a little thing like facts get in the way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @01:13PM
2009 H1N1 killed a lot of people and it was unusually lethal for the young.
(Score: 3, Informative) by sjames on Monday September 08 2014, @01:47PM
It was no worse than the regular old flu which also kills many people every year. While children were more likely to be affected by it than usual, they were not more likely to die of it in 1st world conditions.
It was NOT an emergency of any kind in the United States. We could have done a lot more good by ignoring it here and sending the money to places where it was actually a problem.
It is also noteworthy that at the same time the panic was flying hot and heavy, we were urged not to let it put a crimp in our Black Friday plans. Yes, it's a deadly communicable disease but there's no reason to avoid the thickest crowds of the year.
By the time the 'vaccine' became available, it was already on the wane.
To put it all in perspective, more people in the U.S. died of traffic accidents in that same timeframe.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Monday September 08 2014, @03:26PM
Except that it was worse, especially when it first started.
"Problem". Why send money to places where "it was actually a problem", if it was no worse than a regular flu?
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday September 08 2014, @04:07PM
Except that it was worse, especially when it first started.
It was worse in a town in Mexico. A fairly poor town. As soon as it expanded out of the area, the stats looked a lot different.
"Problem". Why send money to places where "it was actually a problem", if it was no worse than a regular flu?
Because in places with poor nutrition and substandard healthcare, even the regular flu is a problem.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Monday September 08 2014, @04:49PM
Exactly. It was worse than a normal flu when it started, which is always a good reason to be concerned. Also, the stats looked different from a normal flu year too, more people under 65 died with some countries such as Mexico experiencing an unusually high mortality rate even for a place with "poor nutrition and substandard healthcare".
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday September 08 2014, @05:48PM
I already indicated that the initial concern was warranted. However, by the time we got into full on panic mode and blew a billion dollars on tamiflu, we had plenty of figures to suggest it wasn't going to be a problem here. It was also fairly clear that no vaccine would be developed in time to actually be useful. By the time it was available, we already had figures that showed it was waning fast, yet we had every media outlet with it's hair on fire screaming that we must get the vaccine NOW!
Pro tip: If 'authorities' are REALLY worried about a pandemic, they'll say stay home from work and school and skip the mall and other crowded places.
Otherwise, it's just adult children playing a scary game with other people's real money, as usual.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday September 08 2014, @07:47PM
Forgetting the flu for a moment, the authorities are putting armed soldiers around villages [nytimes.com] to make sure no one leaves.
I'd say its fairly well beyond adult children playing scary games.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @08:43PM
You've chosen to misconstrue sjame's definition of "authorities."
Those west african countries do not have representative governments. Thus they are proven to over-reactions that harm the groups of people with the least say in the matter rather than make the most effective decisions. Or more simply, they aren't authorities they are rulers.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Monday September 08 2014, @11:18PM
Which is a subclass of authorities. You aren't going anywhere with that argument.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday September 09 2014, @03:35AM
How is that even remotely germane?
They are exactly the authorities they have ALWAYS had. The point is that someone is stepping up and saying to them that the villagers will not be allowed to scatter and spread the infection further. And that is a far cry from some taking head on tv beseeching people to get flu shots.
If you think that couldn't happen in the western democracies you better think again. Given a proportionate sized infection here, travel would be shut down, roads closed, military mobilized, and quarantines imposed.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday September 09 2014, @12:38AM
Well, unlike the 2009 swine flu in the U.S., ebola could actually be a real problem in Africa. And I would say the guards are sending a pretty strong 'stay home' message which is probably justifiable..
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday September 09 2014, @12:24AM
Problem is that it's hard to know when it happens if it's going to be a hazardous infection or just something that will affect a few and then be gone. Just like safety belts are useless until you need it. But then it will also be too late to put it on..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @03:48AM
So... The Western perspective is wrong again.
(Score: 2) by tynin on Monday September 08 2014, @01:21PM
I was more going with the view of someone in Liberia or surrounding countries might be thinking today, and not a Westerner.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @04:28PM
Yeesh! I think you put your tinfoil hat on a bit too tightly. Time for a reality check. Just sayin'.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Monday September 08 2014, @02:54PM
I ignited an infinite shitstorm on HN a month or so ago, just by proposing that possibly the virus could finally have mutated to aerosol transmission as has been predicted for many years.
Thats a pretty hard core statist conformist website so they as a group got goatse level butt hurt that someone could even propose theoretically there's a chance that historical .gov claims might be slightly inaccurate. Because Big Brother loves us and we've always been at war with Eastasia or whatever the quote.
I mean think about it, you got specialist docs in a region where this stuff happens all the time and those medical workers were/are dropping like flies... hmm.
HN instantly got all paternalistic racist with what boils down to "everyone knows none of those dumb n***ers can read" (their words not mine, I couldn't disagree further) and some fairly comical stuff about medical workers have never heard of epidemics, so we can assume the docs in africa are only dying because they're racially stupider than white docs, oh other than that whole white docs are croaking now too, thing. Nothing funnier than reading liberal racists in the morning.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Monday September 08 2014, @11:43PM
What is "HN" and why should we care?
Actual both assumptions are wrong. Most of the medical personnel doing the dying don't routinely use sufficient protection or have experience with Ebola. Ebola hasn't appeared in Liberia before either so it doesn't happen all the time there. Finally, to address your original assertion, if Ebola could reliably travel via air, then we'd see a lot more cases and a lot more bodies than we currently do.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kaszz on Monday September 08 2014, @02:37AM
Game theory in a nutshell ;)
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday September 08 2014, @08:31PM
1. Tell the truth: your child gets sent to the Ebola isolation ward - risking infection with a dangerous virus that the kid might not have.
2. Lie: your kid gets better care and is not surrounded by people who have a 50% chance of dying from an infectious disease.
Really? So in your view, what we are dealing with here is a case of rampant False Positives suddenly being exposed to real diseases in the hospitals?
The problem dear sir, is False Negatives:
The fact that early symptoms of Ebola virus disease mimic those of many other common infectious diseases increases the likelihood that Ebola patients will be treated in the same ward as patients suffering from other infections [sciencemag.org], putting cases and medical staff alike at very high risk of exposure.
We are talking about third world countries, where people don't run to a doctor for sniffles or even diarrhea. They don't have the hospital beds for that, even in the best of times. Right now, there is NOTHING BUT Ebola beds in hospitals.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @02:37AM
Africa First, then The WORLD gonna feel da powa yo!!!!!!!!!!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by quacking duck on Monday September 08 2014, @03:24AM
We could blame uneducated, ignorant people in developing countries who don't understand basic science and medicine, for allowing this disease to spread and disregarding proven methods to contain it.
But then, we have (allegedly) educated, intelligent people in developed countries who should understand basic science and medicine, who still believe vaccines cause autism or other horrifying but statistically unlikely consequences, and allow multiple diseases to come back with a vengeance by disregarding proven methods to contain them.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @03:30AM
All black nerds have AIDS. Don't have sex with nerds!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @03:52AM
And the root cause is the same in both cases -- a fundamental distrust of authority. And both groups have good reason to distrust. In places like sierra leone trust in government, particularly among the rural poor is non-existent. Decades of corruption, abuse of power and marginalization have taught these people that the government is just a tool for the powerful to take from the dis-empowered.
In the west we constantly hear about "government-business partnerships" that are sweetheart deals for business, but not so great for the people. [csmonitor.com] Drug studies with negative results that are suppressed, [scientificamerican.com] food libel laws, [wikipedia.org] etc. The list of corruptions is practically endless, we are just a richer society so the effects aren't as brutal as they are in west africa.
But in both places it is a loss of trust that results in people disregarding otherwise sound medical advice. Societies need trust to operate efficiently, the less trust the less robust the social fabric. Death from preventable diseases is ultimately just a symptom of reduced trust. So far it does not look like we in the west are doing anything significant to rebuild that trust.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @08:50AM
If they could deceive people about tamiflu they could deceive about vaccines too. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/apr/10/tamiflu-saga-drug-trials-big-pharma [theguardian.com]
Lots of money involved when it comes to mass treatments.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Monday September 08 2014, @03:31PM
I think this is more true. The developed world has far less corruption than the poorer parts of Africa. And I don't think it's because one region is rich and one is poor. Rather cause and effect are reversed. The developed world is wealthy because in large part it has tried to address corruption.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2014, @07:05PM
Don't make this into a chicken-and-egg debate. It doesn't really matter how we got to where we are, what matters is what we do going forward.
Trust is eroding in the west, part of that is due to the internet because it makes it so much easier for regular people to hear about corruption that would have otherwise gone unnoticed, but in my opinion part of it is due to increasing levels of corruption that are going unaddressed. Too big to fail, in-egalitarian cash settlements rather than jail time for banksters, etc.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Monday September 08 2014, @11:16PM
No. This isn't a chicken or egg debate. This is confusing cause and effect. It really does matter how we got here.
And notice how of often that erosion in trust is blamed for the increasing levels of corruption. For example, there was a recent post blaming [soylentnews.org] the failings of modern public funding of research on the Golden Fleece awards [wikipedia.org]. If only we were more gullible, then this corruption and betrayal of trust would be so much more better for us.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Monday September 08 2014, @06:47AM
Agreed. There are some people who really need to be put in jail or worse for such stupid things. A parent who prevents his or her child from getting a vaccine and then that child develops that disease or denies a child medical care because of religious belief ought to be burned at the stake. That would neatly rid the country of most of the Christian Science and other religious wackos. I understand religious faith but God gave us brains to use!
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday September 08 2014, @12:48PM
You'll want to be careful with that though. At the same time, we don't want to continue promoting the trend of treating every boo-boo as a medical emergency. There is value in a child learning that all in all, when they get sick, they will get better on their own with simple supportive measures at home. No need to panic and run to the emergency for every sneeze and cough.
Yes, I do know that you are talking about known deadly diseases (or at least potentially deadly), but if we start jailing parents when their sick chioldren die, nobody will be able to risk choosing bedrest over the emergency room for the common cold. They'll need documentation from a 'medical authority' that they 'did something' about 'the problem'. so child services doesn't take their children and stick them in a negligent and abusive foster home for their own good.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday September 09 2014, @12:31AM
They use them, just not in the way you think is right .. ;)