80 people being monitored in Dallas area for Ebola; Update: 100?

posted at 10:01 am on October 2, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

The net keeps getting cast wider and wider in the CDC effort to contain the nation’s first Ebola case in Dallas. Initially, only a handful of people had been under observation, comprising all those who had direct contact with the patient, now identified as Thomas Eric Duncan. Four are under quarantine orders, but the number of people under observation has grown to 80:

Health officials are monitoring not only the people the Dallas Ebola patient had contact with while he was contagious and not isolated, but also dozens of people that they subsequently contacted, Dallas County Health and Human Services spokeswoman Erikka Neroes said Thursday.

Eighty people — the patient’s contacts, plus people with whom they had contact — are now being monitored for Ebola in the Dallas area, Neroes said. Earlier, Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings said the patient’s direct contacts numbered up to 20.

None has shown symptoms, and all are being given educational materials, Neroes said.

None of the 80 has been quarantined, Neroes said. However, Dallas County health officials have ordered four close relatives of the patient, Thomas Eric Duncan, to stay home and not have any visitors until at least October 19.

CNN offered this video report before the observation numbers went up:

Meanwhile, Reuters has more of the story on Duncan. It turns out that he had direct contact with an Ebola patient in Liberia who died — four days before he got on the plane to the US. While CNN reported that Duncan volunteered that he’d been to Liberia when he first went to the hospital, it does not appear that he revealed his contact with the Ebola victim in Liberia:

The New York Times said that Duncan, in his mid-40s, helped transport a pregnant woman suffering from Ebola to a hospital in Liberia, where she was turned away for lack of space. Duncan helped bring the woman back to her family’s home and carried her into the house, where she later died, the newspaper reported.

Four days later Duncan left for the United States, the Times said, citing the woman’s parents and neighbors.

His return to the hospital was messier than first reported, and may be a problem for those in the apartment complex where he stayed:

Two days after he was sent home from a Dallas hospital, the man who is the first person to be diagnosed with Ebola in the United States was seen vomiting on the ground outside an apartment complex as he was bundled into an ambulance. …

“His whole family was screaming. He got outside and he was throwing up all over the place,” resident Mesud Osmanovic, 21, said on Wednesday, describing the chaotic scene before the man was admitted to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital on Sunday where he is in serious condition.

Byron York points out that all of this shows just how wrong the Obama administration was when it declared it had the situation under control in air travel:

The chances of an Ebola outbreak in the United States are “extremely low,” Obama said. U.S. are working with officials in Africa “to increase screening at airports so that someone with the virus doesn’t get on a plane for the United States.” And then this:

In the unlikely event that someone with Ebola does reach our shores, we’ve taken new measures so that we’re prepared here at home. We’re working to help flight crews identify people who are sick, and more labs across our country now have the capacity to quickly test for the virus. We’re working with hospitals to make sure that they are prepared, and to ensure that our doctors, our nurses and our medical staff are trained, are ready, and are able to deal with a possible case safely.

Obama added that in the unlikely event an Ebola case appeared in the United States, “we have world-class facilities and professionals ready to respond. And we have effective surveillance mechanisms in place.”

Now two weeks later, the president’s reassurances have turned out to be false. A Liberian infected with the virus, Thomas Eric Duncan, flew from Monrovia to Brussels to Virginia to Dallas. No screening at any airport stopped him, nor did any flight crews. The possibility that someone with Ebola reached American shores turned out not to be “unlikely” at all. And then, when Duncan arrived in Dallas, the doctors, nurses and medical staff at the hospital he entered were not prepared and in fact released him back into the Dallas population where, fully symptomatic, he had contact with lots of people. The system, in other words was not “able to deal with a possible case safely.”

True — but it does show that sending a large medical and military team to confront the problem at the source was a wise decision. We want Obama to fight a forward strategy against Islamist terror networks so that we defeat them “over there” rather than fight them here. That same principle applies in the fight against Ebola, for the same reason — it’s better to play offense at the source than defense at the target.

Update: Andrew Malcolm wonders whether this is Obama’s Katrina:

Obama will boast in his speech at Northwestern University’s prestigious Kellogg School of Management of reducing the unemployment rate from 10+% to 6.1% and creating 10 million new jobs.

But he’ll leave out the inconvenient facts that the unemployment rate’s down because so many simply gave up looking and most of the new jobs are part-time.

Worse, polls show two-out-of-three Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. They no longer believe their chief executive. And there’s been a hailstorm of crises both abroad (Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, ISIS, Iran) and at home, which combine in the impression of executive inattention, incompetence and lack of control.

Now comes Ebola, which has the real potential to be Obama’s Katrina.

President Bush didn’t cause the hurricane, just as Obama did not cause the worst outbreak yet of the deadly virus in West Africa. The problem was how Bush’s people mis-handled the aftermath, complicated by incompetent, corrupt local governments. …

Hopefully, Frieden proves right and, given the advanced state of the U.S. healthcare system, the upcoming U.S. Ebola outbreak is quickly smothered through isolation and treatment.

But if a fair number of carriers slip through our flimsy airport screening or if some are stricken among the 3,000 American military Obama dispatched to fight a microscopic enemy in Africa’s health wars, it will be interesting to see who Obama fingers to blame for his actions.

Presumably, Frieden’s resume is up-to-date.

Well, let’s hope it’s not a Katrina-level event here in the US. It’s already much worse than that in Africa.

Update: CNN now reports that the number of potential primary and secondary contacts has grown to 100:

Health officials are reaching out to as many as 100 people who may have had contact with the first Ebola patient diagnosed in the U.S., a spokeswoman with the Texas Department of State Health Services said Thursday.

These are people who are still being questioned because they may have crossed paths with the patient either at the hospital, at his apartment complex or in the community.

“Out of an abundance of caution, we’re starting with this very wide net, including people who have had even brief encounters with the patient or the patient’s home,” spokeswoman Carrie Williams said. “The number will drop as we focus in on those whose contact may represent a potential risk of infection.”

The number of direct contacts who have been identified and are being monitored right now is “more than 12,” a federal official told CNN on Thursday.

CNN also updated their video report:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

Ebola can’t be treated? You should really inform doctors of this because they seem to think otherwise.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 3:59 PM

Hint- there’s a difference between treatment and cure or treatment and inoculation.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:02 PM

I’m comparing you freaking out about an event you think might happen even though you have no evidence of it and can’t do anything about it if it did happen to another issue people sometimes panic about without reason.

Seem pretty analogous to me.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM

I have no proof that would hold up in a court of law. I may be wrong, and I hope I am. But there is plenty of evidence I have to support my misgivings, not the least of which is the Reston incident of 1989. If you believe that my desire to see West Africa cut off from the rest of the civilized world until they can get their shit together is unreasonable, you are entitled to your opinion. But you’ll need more evidence for your beliefs than just a LOL.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Hint- there’s a difference between treatment and cure or treatment and inoculation.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:02 PM

That’s right. And supportive care requires a tremendous number of supportive vectors, er people.

WryTrvllr on October 2, 2014 at 4:04 PM

The Five Quarantined Dallas Children Attended Classes This Week at 4 Different Dallas Schools
Dallas Independent School District Superintendent Mike Miles also revealed that five children from four of the district’s campuses were possibly exposed to the virus.
Miles identified the schools as:
Conrad High School
Tasby Middle School
Hotchkiss Elementary School
Dan D. Rogers Elementary School

slickwillie2001 on October 2, 2014 at 2:36 PM

Pray for the Lunch Ladies…

Newtie and the Beauty on October 2, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Ebola can’t be treated? You should really inform doctors of this because they seem to think otherwise.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 3:59 PM

Ebola, per se, cannot be treated. The care is supportive care including replacements of fluids and sometimes blood and blood components.

bofh on October 2, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Ebola can’t be treated? You should really inform doctors of this because they seem to think otherwise.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 3:59 PM

LOL. Ebola is untreatable, you blithering idiot. There are experimental treatments but they are not proven to do anything. The recovery rate of those brought here is the same as the rate in Africa, experimental sooper-dooper treatment or not.

But, you go to the doctors who think that Ebola is treatable. I would have no use for anyone that dumb and uninformed.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on October 2, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Ebola can’t be treated? You should really inform doctors of this because they seem to think otherwise.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 3:59 PM

You can treat any symptoms. You know that’s not what I’m talking about, you disingenuous swine.

By the by, malaria is caused by a protozoan which can be killed by quinine, and dysentery is bacterial and can be treated with antibiotics. There are no such treatments for Ebola yet, unless you count the unproven tabaccy juice that wouldn’t be allowed on the market for years under any other circumstances.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:06 PM

Given that this patient did not come on a flight directly from Africa obviously your idea of cutting them off doesn’t work. You’d have to magically get rid of connecting flights or isolate the us from all air travel.

Good luck with that.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:07 PM

Hint- there’s a difference between treatment and cure or treatment and inoculation.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:02 PM

LOL. Patting someone on the head and telling them they’ll be fine isn’t really “treatment”.

By your definition every disease is treatable … But, that’s just like the left – destroy the language so that nothing has any meaning left. Then everyone can be as confused and befuddled as you always are.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on October 2, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Hint- there’s a difference between treatment and cure or treatment and inoculation.
Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:02 PM

Neat tautology that.
Tlaloc on September 29, 2014 at 3:11 PM

Newtie and the Beauty on October 2, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Then use the right words gryphon. If you mean it can’t be cured then say that. If you say it can’t be treated you’re just flat wrong..

Of course you aren’t alone in that judging by a couple of other posters here.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:10 PM

Given that this patient did not come on a flight directly from Africa obviously your idea of cutting them off doesn’t work. You’d have to magically get rid of connecting flights or isolate the us from all air travel.

Good luck with that.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:07 PM

Several European countries have already cut West Africa off. Your argument is a logical fallacy of the first order. Just because it hasn’t been done doesn’t mean it shouldn’t, or couldn’t. But that would totally nuke the whole open borders movement, wouldn’t it? Is that what this is really about to you, libwit? We finally have a good reason to slam the borders shut, which even those conservatives who are calling me “paranoid” would like to see, and your best argument against it is rank liberal mockery.

/SMDH

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:10 PM

Newtie clearly doesn’t understand the term “tautology”.

For those who think Ebola can’t be treated, what is it you think hospitals do for them? Nothing?

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Then use the right words gryphon. If you mean it can’t be cured then say that. If you say it can’t be treated you’re just flat wrong..

Of course you aren’t alone in that judging by a couple of other posters here.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:10 PM

GFY. Really. You are a caricature of yourself and you passed that line a long time ago.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:12 PM

Given that this patient did not come on a flight directly from Africa obviously your idea of cutting them off doesn’t work. You’d have to magically get rid of connecting flights or isolate the us from all air travel.
Good luck with that.
Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:07 PM

Liberal logic at it’s finest, folks…

Newtie and the Beauty on October 2, 2014 at 4:12 PM

If you say it can’t be treated you’re just flat wrong..

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:10 PM

It can’t be treated. The symptoms (and the disease) can’t be stopped or mitigated. Sure, you can burn some incense … but that only qualifies as “treatment” to an idiot like yourself.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on October 2, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Newtie clearly doesn’t understand the term “tautology”.

For those who think Ebola can’t be treated, what is it you think hospitals do for them? Nothing?

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Ebola patients don’t go to hospitals for treatment, moron. They go to hostpitals to be experimented on in the hopes of finding a cure. Ebola is for all intents and purposes a death sentence to those infected.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Thank you for finally admitting that this is all about you just wanting to close the borders and has nothing to do with any health hazard.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:13 PM

For those who think Ebola can’t be treated, what is it you think hospitals do for them? Nothing?

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Nothing that changes their condition in any way, yeah. The biggest function of hospitals for Ebola patients is to keep them isolated from the rest of the population and because … that’s where sick people go.

Do you really think with that brain?

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on October 2, 2014 at 4:14 PM

Thank you for finally admitting that this is all about you just wanting to close the borders and has nothing to do with any health hazard.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:13 PM

The two aren’t mutually exclusive, dumba$$. I’ve been agitating for closed borders for a long time now. With Ebola being the threat that it is, it’s getting harder and harder for libwits like yourself to argue against with any credibility. But I see you haven’t given up on trying. You get an F for effort, douchebag.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:16 PM

Prime-it also counts as treatment to doctors.

Newtie- um, okay so you want to block flights out of west Africa even though we have direct evidence that will not prevent people from weext Africa coming here via connecting flights. So what good does it do exactly?

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Thank you for finally admitting that this is all about you just wanting to close the borders and has nothing to do with any health hazard.
Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Cognitive dissonance, Round Two

Newtie and the Beauty on October 2, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Newtie- um, okay so you want to block flights out of west Africa even though we have direct evidence that will not prevent people from weext Africa coming here via connecting flights. So what good does it do exactly?
Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Liberal logic, Round Two

Newtie and the Beauty on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Idiots. Utter and complete idiots. We deserve what we get.

libfreeordie on October 2, 2014 at 9:48 AM

Schadenfreude on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Ebola’s threat and your hyperventilating are not really connected. You’ve seen an opportunity to blow something completely out of proportion in order to fear monger and try to scare people into accepting a political end they wouldn’t have otherwise.

Kind of makes you a terrorist now that I think about it…

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Prime-it also counts as treatment to doctors.

Newtie- um, okay so you want to block flights out of west Africa even though we have direct evidence that will not prevent people from weext Africa coming here via connecting flights. So what good does it do exactly?

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:17 PM

We haven’t even attempted it yet. If we wanted to stop Thomas Duncan from coming here, we could have. Or does the term “boarding pass itinerary” mean nothing to you? I don’t give a greasy brown shit what any other country has done in the past or is doing now. I want to keep disease-ridden illegal immigrants out of America. My stance on that remains absolutely utterly and 100% unchanged since the moment I formed an opinion on the matter. Our failure to acknowledge the problem is not “proof” that an untried solution wouldn’t work.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Given that this patient did not come on a flight directly from Africa obviously your idea of cutting them off doesn’t work. You’d have to magically get rid of connecting flights or isolate the us from all air travel.

Good luck with that.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:07 PM

Stupid desperado on display

Schadenfreude on October 2, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Ebola’s threat and your hyperventilating are not really connected. You’ve seen an opportunity to blow something completely out of proportion in order to fear monger and try to scare people into accepting a political end they wouldn’t have otherwise.
Kind of makes you a terrorist now that I think about it…
Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Gurl…bye.

Newtie and the Beauty on October 2, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Ebola’s threat and your hyperventilating are not really connected. You’ve seen an opportunity to blow something completely out of proportion in order to fear monger and try to scare people into accepting a political end they wouldn’t have otherwise.

Kind of makes you a terrorist now that I think about it…

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Yeah. Because my desire to keep disease out of America and off American soil is totally like people that kill in order to effect political change. I’m so busted.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Oh come on people. You weren’t looking for a sarc tag down here, I hope? I didn’t really think it was necessary.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:23 PM

Y’all must really be bored to play the troll’s game.

cozmo on October 2, 2014 at 4:31 PM

Ebola’s threat and your hyperventilating are not really connected. You’ve seen an opportunity to blow something completely out of proportion in order to fear monger and try to scare people into accepting a political end they wouldn’t have otherwise.

Kind of makes you a terrorist now that I think about it…

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

This is some serious top-notch trolling here. Completely void of logic and an ad hominem attack to boot. Pretty impressive.

307wolverine on October 2, 2014 at 4:34 PM

Ebola’s threat and your hyperventilating are not really connected. You’ve seen an opportunity to blow something completely out of proportion in order to fear monger and try to scare people into accepting a political end they wouldn’t have otherwise.

Kind of makes you a terrorist now that I think about it…

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

We didn’t know you wrote Obama’s speeches too…..

itsspideyman on October 2, 2014 at 4:50 PM

I just heard on the radio that what we are calling “Ebola” here in Dallas is actually “Marburg” and, allegedly, is less fatal than “Ebola”.

Anyone else able to provide more information??

E9RET on October 2, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Kind of makes you a terrorist now that I think about it…

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Tazeing off your mouth again, I see! That would explain the high post count in this thread.

Speaking of non-guns, care to tell us why so many major Democrat states refuse to let their citizens own tasers?

Del Dolemonte on October 2, 2014 at 5:10 PM

I just heard on the radio that what we are calling “Ebola” here in Dallas is actually “Marburg” and, allegedly, is less fatal than “Ebola”.

Anyone else able to provide more information??

E9RET on October 2, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Marburg is a filovirus in the same class as Ebola, but there has been disagreement on whether it is a variant strain of the ebolavirus discovered in 1976. Currently, marburgvirus and ebolavirus are considered taxonomically distinct subgeni of the filovirus genus.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 5:13 PM

Think about the very plausible chain of events. How many more people could/would be infected before being isolated? How much longer, if ever, would it be before these people were even monitored? It would seem that if someone like him went to third world Mexico City, rather than first world Dallas, the chances for a “break out” would be far higher. And If there were a “break out”, how many more Mexicans would invade America to get far away from it? And how many of them would have been infected with Ebola?

VorDaj on October 2, 2014 at 2:04 PM

This is a very troubling scenario – passing the virus through Mexico and then to us via the porous southern border could produce a huge force-multiplier effect as each initial infected terrorist could spawn many self-propelled unwitting secondary carriers. And the (apparently) multi-week incubation period allows plenty of time for travel, even by foot.

bofh on October 2, 2014 at 5:52 PM

Here are questions I hear being asked and no one’s answering during press briefings here in Dallas and/or CDC Atlanta. Some of these are paraphrased since I didn’t get the exact words.

“Is Duncan in the country legally?”

“Is Duncan’s family in the U.S. legally?”

“Was Duncan asked if he suspected he had the infection and that was why he came to the U.S. four days after he had contact with his infected female friend?”

personally, I think he strongly suspected he was infected and thought that his only chance of survival was an American hospital

“Did Duncan tell his family that he might be infected?”

“What type of interaction between Duncan and the four people now in quarantine led to the quarantine?”

Assumptions? Conclusions? Opinions?

E9RET on October 2, 2014 at 5:59 PM

Some teenage idiot altered a Fox News report on Twitter saying Ebola was in Frisco,Tx. (A suburb in a neighboring county north of Dallas, Co.)

Some parents kept their kids home from school.

He got his sociopathic spoiled dumbass busted.

God Help Us…People are stupid.

workingclass artist on October 2, 2014 at 6:12 PM

I just heard on the radio that what we are calling “Ebola” here in Dallas is actually “Marburg” and, allegedly, is less fatal than “Ebola”.

Anyone else able to provide more information??

E9RET on October 2, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Here ya go…Mayo Clinic link

“Ebola virus and Marburg virus are related viruses that cause hemorrhagic fevers — illnesses marked by severe bleeding (hemorrhage), organ failure and, in many cases, death. Both viruses are native to Africa, where sporadic outbreaks have occurred for decades.

Ebola virus and Marburg virus live in animal hosts, and humans can contract the viruses from infected animals. After the initial transmission, the viruses can spread from person to person through contact with body fluids or contaminated needles.

No drug has been approved to treat either virus. People diagnosed with Ebola or Marburg virus receive supportive care and treatment for complications. Scientists are coming closer to developing vaccines for these deadly diseases.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention monitors the United States for conditions such as Ebola infection, and its labs can test for the Ebola virus. Mayo Clinic does not test for the Ebola and Marburg viruses.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/ebola-virus/basics/symptoms/con-20031241

workingclass artist on October 2, 2014 at 6:16 PM

They need to monitor the people who cleaned up the site too. And the people who walked through his vomit.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/10/what-ebola-quarantine-photo-shows-person-delivering-food-to-texas-ebola-victims-family/

Take a gander at the picture. Your skin will crawl.

CDC is not serious, because they are just another bunch of well paid federal employees, who like their 401Ks more than the truth.

Seriously. I made it twenty years in police work without getting any bugs (unlike my friend), or losing any body parts.

Now this? Hardly, I told my buddy I’m carrying around a spray bottle with 10% bleach and spritzing anybody who coughs on me!! He laughed so hard I thought he would drop the phone.

Yeah, whatever, cough and see what happens!!!

archer52 on October 2, 2014 at 6:20 PM

Ebola’s threat and your hyperventilating are not really connected. You’ve seen an opportunity to blow something completely out of proportion in order to fear monger and try to scare people into accepting a political end they wouldn’t have otherwise.

Kind of makes you a terrorist now that I think about it…

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM

All that matters to you is that this makes your President Lightbringer look bad. Now go back to Twitter to join the rest of the liberals in gleefully hoping that the entire population of the State of Texas will be wiped out by this disease.

Gator Country on October 2, 2014 at 6:30 PM

All that matters to you is that this makes your President Lightbringer look bad. Now go back to Twitter to join the rest of the liberals in gleefully hoping that the entire population of the State of Texas will be wiped out by this disease.

Gator Country on October 2, 2014 at 6:30 PM

It amuses me how binary you folks are. Everyone who isn’t with you on everything is ipso facto against you on everything. If they don’t subscribe to every ridiculous conspiracy theory you dredge up from WND then they must be slavishly devoted to “teh Won.”

It actually explains a lot about the history of conservativism over the last 30 years or so.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 7:02 PM

Tazeing off your mouth again, I see! That would explain the high post count in this thread.

Speaking of non-guns, care to tell us why so many major Democrat states refuse to let their citizens own tasers?

Del Dolemonte on October 2, 2014 at 5:10 PM

Why do you insist on taking arguments you already lost (repeatedly now) into new threads? Is it some form of masochism?

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM

We haven’t even attempted it yet. If we wanted to stop Thomas Duncan from coming here, we could have. Or does the term “boarding pass itinerary” mean nothing to you? I don’t give a greasy brown shit what any other country has done in the past or is doing now. I want to keep disease-ridden illegal immigrants out of America. My stance on that remains absolutely utterly and 100% unchanged since the moment I formed an opinion on the matter. Our failure to acknowledge the problem is not “proof” that an untried solution wouldn’t work.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:20 PM

A) you offer no evidence that we could have identified Thomas Duncan ahead of time
B) you offer no evidence that we have the infrastructure in place to have kept any Thomas Duncans off a plane in, well, every foreign country around the world
C) you offer no evidence that Duncan is an illegal immigrant

You can kind of see why it seems like you are grabbing a crisis and using it to flog your own personal hobby horse, since your position fails even the most cursory review of facts and logic.

But then I get the feeling that facts and logic are not really valued in your world.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 7:13 PM

All that matters to you is that this makes your President Lightbringer look bad. Now go back to Twitter to join the rest of the liberals in gleefully hoping that the entire population of the State of Texas will be wiped out by this disease.

Gator Country on October 2, 2014 at 6:30 PM

How does this make Obama look bad? It looks like the nurse in the ER on Saturday didn’t share the information that the patient came from Liberia.

I think everyone is getting themselves wound up way too quickly. No one else is apparently showing symptoms.

We’re already 3-5 days into the incubation period for secondary infections. Incubation can take up to 21 days, but the original patient started showing some symptoms about 6 or 7 days after exposure, if I’m understanding the timeline correctly. So if no one else shows symptoms by tthe end of this weekend, we should be in pretty good shape.

jim56 on October 2, 2014 at 7:26 PM

We haven’t even attempted it yet. If we wanted to stop Thomas Duncan from coming here, we could have. Or does the term “boarding pass itinerary” mean nothing to you? I don’t give a greasy brown shit what any other country has done in the past or is doing now. I want to keep disease-ridden illegal immigrants out of America. My stance on that remains absolutely utterly and 100% unchanged since the moment I formed an opinion on the matter. Our failure to acknowledge the problem is not “proof” that an untried solution wouldn’t work.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:20 PM

My understanding is that it took the airlines a few days to identify whether he made his connection to the US in London, Brussels or somewhere else in Europe. That suggests they probably couldn’t do the monitoring.

And this guy is not an “illegal” immigrant. He came here to visit the US and apply for a permit, if I’m understanding the situation correctly. He went through passport control/customs properly in Virginia.

jim56 on October 2, 2014 at 7:29 PM

So if no one else shows symptoms by tthe end of this weekend, we should be in pretty good shape.

jim56 on October 2, 2014 at 7:26 PM

So the outbreak in Africa is under control, huh?

cptacek on October 2, 2014 at 7:43 PM

So if no one else shows symptoms by tthe end of this weekend, we should be in pretty good shape.

jim56 on October 2, 2014 at 7:26 PM

So the outbreak in Africa is under control, huh?

cptacek on October 2, 2014 at 7:43 PM

Aren’t new people showing symptoms every day in Africa?

jim56 on October 2, 2014 at 7:55 PM

Given that this patient did not come on a flight directly from Africa obviously your idea of cutting them off doesn’t work. You’d have to magically get rid of connecting flights or isolate the us from all air travel.
Good luck with that.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:07 PM

.
.
We had stopped ALL air travel … both domestic and international flights, by 9:30 AM EDT on Sept 11, 2001.

It didn’t seem particularly “magical” . . . . . the President ordered it, and that was that.

listens2glenn on October 2, 2014 at 8:19 PM

You see, you can’t even get the facts as they currently exist right. Ebola does not have a 90% fatality. One particularly bad outbreak in the past had a 90% fatality rate, but no other outbreak has been anywhere near that level…

NotCoach on October 2, 2014 at 2:05 PM

The fact is that Ebola Zaire, this strain, has had a mortality rate anywhere from a low of 60% to a high of 100% – although the 100% occurrences were a single person. But there have been previous outbreaks with mortality rates of 88%, 83%, and 82% which I sure would call “anywhere near that level” of 90%. Even a 60% fatality rate, the lowest for a Zaire outbreak, is pretty darned horrifying.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 8:44 PM

AIDS is far more deadly than the common cold, but is much harder to get. It spreads by specific acts (buggery, sharing needles with an infected person, transfusion with infected blood). Indeed, AIDS would be very easy to eliminate from the world, if people would abstain from IV drugs or buttsex.

But of course we can’t demand people do that, Because Political Correctness!

ConstantineXI on October 2, 2014 at 2:06 PM

I hate to break it to you, but it’s only in the USA that it’s primarily spread by homos3xual acts – in other nations it’s primarily a heteros3xual disease. It is more easily spread by ‘rear entry’ so to speak, but it manages transmission just fine with plain ‘ol missionary s3x too.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 8:46 PM

The average EVD case fatality rate is around 50%. Case fatality rates have varied from 25% to 90% in past outbreaks.

ConstantineXI on October 2, 2014 at 2:11 PM

This isn’t the average EVD – it’s EVD Zaire, which has a far higher mortality rate than the other EVD strains. In fact, per the WHO link I already provided, the LOWEST EVD Zaire outbreak mortality rate so far was 60% – and most were notably higher.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 8:52 PM

You can kind of see why it seems like you are grabbing a crisis and using it to flog your own personal hobby horse, since your position fails even the most cursory review of facts and logic.

Except that it doesn’t. Since picking apart your logical fallacies won’t do any good, I won’t bother deconstructing your so-called argument. But accusing me of using a crisis to flog my own personal hobby horse is rich, considering that it was a liberal who famously said “…never let a crisis go to waste.”

But then I get the feeling that facts and logic are not really valued in your world.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 7:13 PM

And I get the feeling that life and private property aren’t really valued in yours. Touche.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 9:46 PM

Sounds like the opening chapters of World War Z E.

Sockpuppet Politic on October 2, 2014 at 2:50 PM

There, fixed it for ya. :0)

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 9:47 PM

This isn’t the average EVD – it’s EVD Zaire, which has a far higher mortality rate than the other EVD strains. In fact, per the WHO link I already provided, the LOWEST EVD Zaire outbreak mortality rate so far was 60% – and most were notably higher.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 8:52 PM

What if it’s not Zaire, though? EVD Zaire has existed for 38 years, largely without incident. Is it possible that what we are witnessing may be something logistically akin to the Spanish Flu outbreak of 1918? That particular flu strain seemed to mutate into something less deadly within a year after its appearance, but it did a lot of damage before it did.

I am aware that viral outbreaks are self-correcting. I don’t dispute that point. But even the flu, at 10-20% mortality, managed to kill tens of millions of people in 1918. Isn’t it in the least bit reasonable to even suspect that Ebolavirus could be even worse?

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 9:49 PM

Don’t worry, that’s a VARSITY game plan. Too much for the JV squad.

Nutstuyu on October 2, 2014 at 2:54 PM

Yes, I’m sure you’re right, after all, Obama tells us so, right? ;-)

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 9:54 PM

The issue with the scenario where terrorists try to use Ebola by intentionally infecting themselves is the very short period between infection and either death or recovery. We’re talking usually about three days once symptoms appear. And during this period the victim is not exactly a marathon runner.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Where do you people get such nonsense from? The incubation period for Ebola is between 2 to 21 days – with the most commonly quoted “average” of 4 to 9 days in some official sources, and 5 to 11 in others. And that’s just to the INITIAL symptoms, which are often pretty mild — and most people who have it are still quite mobile for DAYS or even a week or more after the first symptoms begin.

Once ill, the person can die within hours to several weeks – and I believe, but am not certain, that the average there is a couple of weeks before they either die, or begin recovering. Even once all symptoms are gone, for some time they are infectious – in fact it’s been demonstrated that Ebola (sufficient to be infectious) can persist in s3men and [email protected] fluids for somewhere between 61 to 75 days after the person otherwise seems to have recovered and isn’t showing symptoms.

It takes a single day to fly to the USA, and we’ve just had very conclusively proven in Dallas. It wouldn’t take much more than that to fly to Mexico and cross illegally over our southern border either, if one has a little bit of money – and the terrorist groups certainly have plenty of money.

In other words, it’s pretty silly to think that Ebola takes effect too rapidly for someone to get into the USA and infect quite a few others along the way before they are too ill to keep moving about.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Aren’t new people showing symptoms every day in Africa?

jim56 on October 2, 2014 at 7:55 PM

Uh, yeah. That’s my point. Even if this guy didn’t infect other people, there is a whole group of countries that have sick people that won’t get stopped if they try to get to the U.S. We are not in the clear so long as the disease is still spreading and we aren’t stopping people from coming here from that part of the world.

cptacek on October 2, 2014 at 10:14 PM

The patient traveling to Texas from Liberia helped a woman into a car and that was how he became infected. What are the chances that he would’ve come in contact with the virus on a fully clothed woman? Did she spit on him, kiss him on the mouth, drool on her clothing? It appears to me as a casual observer that there’s something less direct happening…

stacman on October 2, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Actually the chances he came in contact with some of her bodily fluids the second he touched her are extremely high. It’s a very hot humid climate over there – you think people don’t have bare skinned arms and legs, and that the don’t have sweat on their skin and likely soaked through their clothes too, especially when they have a fever from an illness? And who knows if she’d thrown up yet or not, or even did so while in the cab with him… or if she was scared and crying, or happened to cough or sneeze while he was within a few feet of her.

In other words, it would be far more likely for him to get infected by carrying a woman with Ebola to a cab than for him to not get infected.

I’ve also seen a number of comments here with folks claiming that he knew she had Ebola – but I think that’s questionable. First, hemorrhagic symptoms often don’t show up at all until later in the disease if they show up at all – a week or two after initial symptoms. And for whatever reason, a large percentage of people in this current outbreak haven’t had any hemorrhagic symptoms at all (I think over 50%)… and of course other diseases with identical symptoms otherwise are quite common over there – malaria, typhus, etc. He obviously knew she was ill (or thought it was pregnancy problems?) – but he may not have known it was Ebola.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Did anyone else see the picture on twitter of the two men spraying down with hoses the vomit on the sidewalk of the apartment complex? The water then filled puddles in the parking lot. And they were not wearing any kind of protective clothing. I wonder if they are being monitored? Doubtful. I also wonder if the cleaning ladies who cleaned the public bathrooms at the hospital ER (which Duncan likely used while he was there) and all their illegal relatives are being monitored? Oh the possibilities.

txmomof6 on October 2, 2014 at 10:16 PM

Which explains our high levels of malaria, dysentery… Oh, right. You’re just talking out your butt again.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Malaria isn’t even a contagious disease – you cannot catch it from another person. There is one species of mosquito that is able to transmit it, and we never had many of them here it the USA. We controlled the mosquitoes that were a problem, and thus pretty much eliminated malaria in the USA. There is no comparison in any way with Ebola.

Dysentery transmission is also completely different than Ebola. Ebola doesn’t come from “living in filth” as you put it, although I’m sure that doesn’t help – but it’s clearly not anywhere near the main mode of transmission. Direct or close contact with someone who’s infected is the primary mode of transmission. Ebola is more like smallpox, cowpox, chicken pox, measles, polio, etc. We’ve controlled those with vaccines primarily, not hygiene so much.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:25 PM

Why do you guys argue with Tlaloc? Not only is he/she ignorant, but arrogant too. In other words, a typical lib.

307wolverine on October 2, 2014 at 10:33 PM

Why do you guys argue with Tlaloc? Not only is he/she ignorant, but arrogant too. In other words, a typical lib.

307wolverine on October 2, 2014 at 10:33 PM

I know. But Tlaloc pushes my buttons in a way few trolls do. And I think Db8 is a lot more articulate than I am in most matters.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 10:36 PM

Then use the right words gryphon. If you mean it can’t be cured then say that. If you say it can’t be treated you’re just flat wrong..Of course you aren’t alone in that judging by a couple of other posters here.

Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:10 PM

Treatment generally refers to something that directly affects the disease itself. There is no treatment for Ebola. People go to the hospital for supportive care – e.g., fluids, electrolyte balance, blood pressure control, etc. Supportive care helps significantly and may drastically reduce the sky high mortality rate (still leaving it sky high, but then 50% is far better than 80% or 90%), but it doesn’t in any way treat the disease.

Given that this patient did not come on a flight directly from Africa obviously your idea of cutting them off doesn’t work. You’d have to magically get rid of connecting flights or isolate the us from all air travel.
Good luck with that.
Tlaloc on October 2, 2014 at 4:07 PM

That’s got to be one of the most ridiculous statements I’ve seen yet. You think airlines aren’t able to tell that the person’s flight originated in one of the affected W. African nations? Especially if the ticket they purchased was to go to the USA? Please. Airlines and pretty much everyone other than you are well aware that flights oven have layovers and transfers, and the airlines do quite well in noting and tracking those.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:38 PM

Ebola patients don’t go to hospitals for treatment, moron. They go to hostpitals to be experimented on in the hopes of finding a cure. Ebola is for all intents and purposes a death sentence to those infected.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Sorry, but that’s grossly mistaken. In fact the mortality rate is significantly lowered if the person gets early supportive care. It’s still very high, but then, 50% is certainly vastly better than 90%. It’s not a death sentence, and hospitalization is very VERY much worth while if the care is good. In fact they even discovered in treating the guy at Emory that Ebola patients have far more problems keeping their potassium levels high enough than anticipated, and that one bit of knowledge alone may help even more. Keeping blood pressure high enough is also a serious problem with Ebola patients, as, of course, is keeping them hydrated. Attend to those factors, however – fluids, electrolyte balance, blood pressure – and the mortality rate is vastly lower than without treatment. And the earlier the supportive care is started the better the prognosis too, apparently.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:42 PM

Sorry, but that’s grossly mistaken. In fact the mortality rate is significantly lowered if the person gets early supportive care. It’s still very high, but then, 50% is certainly vastly better than 90%. It’s not a death sentence, and hospitalization is very VERY much worth while if the care is good. In fact they even discovered in treating the guy at Emory that Ebola patients have far more problems keeping their potassium levels high enough than anticipated, and that one bit of knowledge alone may help even more. Keeping blood pressure high enough is also a serious problem with Ebola patients, as, of course, is keeping them hydrated. Attend to those factors, however – fluids, electrolyte balance, blood pressure – and the mortality rate is vastly lower than without treatment. And the earlier the supportive care is started the better the prognosis too, apparently.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:42 PM

Oh great. I feel so much better flipping a coin than knowing for sure that I’m going to die./

;)

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 10:48 PM

Sorry, but that’s grossly mistaken. In fact the mortality rate is significantly lowered if the person gets early supportive care. It’s still very high, but then, 50% is certainly vastly better than 90%. It’s not a death sentence, and hospitalization is very VERY much worth while if the care is good. In fact they even discovered in treating the guy at Emory that Ebola patients have far more problems keeping their potassium levels high enough than anticipated, and that one bit of knowledge alone may help even more. Keeping blood pressure high enough is also a serious problem with Ebola patients, as, of course, is keeping them hydrated. Attend to those factors, however – fluids, electrolyte balance, blood pressure – and the mortality rate is vastly lower than without treatment. And the earlier the supportive care is started the better the prognosis too, apparently.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:42 PM

But the sequelae must be a bitch. All of that organ damage.

307wolverine on October 2, 2014 at 10:49 PM

But the sequelae must be a bitch. All of that organ damage.

307wolverine on October 2, 2014 at 10:54 PM

We’re already 3-5 days into the incubation period for secondary infections. Incubation can take up to 21 days, but the original patient started showing some symptoms about 6 or 7 days after exposure, if I’m understanding the timeline correctly. So if no one else shows symptoms by tthe end of this weekend, we should be in pretty good shape.

jim56 on October 2, 2014 at 7:26 PM

Sorry, but you have to start counting the incubation period from the LAST moment they could have been infected, not the first. So that means if their apartment wasn’t sterilized until today (if it’s even been done now), the incubation period must run 21 days from today.

Granted, they could have been infected the first day he showed symptoms – but it’s also possible they weren’t infected until the last contaminated thing they could have contacted was sterilized or removed.

Now gawd knows if they’ll require isolation that way, but that’s the only reasonable way to do it – otherwise you risk the chance that they didn’t pick the infection up immediately, and you end the isolation too soon and right after they develop symptoms – and then where are you? Scr32wed, and you have to start all over determining everyone they contacted, etc. Great way to allow the infection to be spread.

So no one else by the end of this weekend is WAY too soon to say there aren’t any more infected. Unfortunately.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:58 PM

What if it’s not Zaire, though? EVD Zaire has existed for 38 years, largely without incident. Is it possible that what we are witnessing may be something logistically akin to the Spanish Flu outbreak of 1918? That particular flu strain seemed to mutate into something less deadly within a year after its appearance, but it did a lot of damage before it did.

I am aware that viral outbreaks are self-correcting. I don’t dispute that point. But even the flu, at 10-20% mortality, managed to kill tens of millions of people in 1918. Isn’t it in the least bit reasonable to even suspect that Ebolavirus could be even worse?

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 9:49 PM

I think that it’s been tested enough times in the lab to know that it’s Zaire. Now, that doesn’t mean it’s not possible that it’s a somewhat mutated strain that’s more problematic, but honestly I don’t see enough evidence of that to think it’s likely.

What’s massively different between this outbreak and all the others is that previously it was always in very small rural areas with very few people coming and going. So it was easy to contain. This is the first time it’s been documented in W. Africa, so they’re not nearly as familiar with it as the central African nations that have had outbreaks in the past… and this time it finally managed to get into heavily populated areas. That makes all the difference in the world.

I am a bit concerned about the number of doctors and health care personnel who’ve been infected – I wouldn’t have expected so many… but then, I don’t know how much protective gear they did or didn’t have, how good their training was, etc.

Oh, and for what it’s worth, I believe the 1918 spanish flu mortality rate was only about 2.5% – but it was SO widespread that it still managed to kill something like 3% of the world’s population – millions of people.

Right now there is concern that Ebola may be so widespread in major metro areas that it could become endemic — e.g., no periodic outbreaks with long lulls in between, but always some level of it ongoing somewhere, spread from person to person. THAT would be pretty nasty, even if kept relatively under control.

Of course, if it does manage to mutate to become truly airborne, that would be an utter nightmare for the entire world. It’s unlikely that will (or has) occurred, but it is possible. It is well known to spread through large droplets… and some tests imply that it might be somewhat airborne already, although nowhere near to the extent of the flu or common cold… and airborne transmission has never been documented between people. But then, we really don’t know very much at all about Ebola, because this is the first time it’s ever found it’s way into large population areas, so we’re seeing now what does and doesn’t happen, and unfortunately in the processes we’ll learn a lot more about how it behaves/transmission etc.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 11:12 PM

Why do you guys argue with Tlaloc? Not only is he/she ignorant, but arrogant too. In other words, a typical lib.

307wolverine on October 2, 2014 at 10:33 PM

Well, for me, probably because I don’t regularly read all the comment sections, so I’m not particularly familiar with tlaloc… and I’m prone to reply to anything I see that I think is in error, simply because even if the person who says it is hopeless, I figure that others who aren’t might read and appreciate information, just as I appreciate it from others (even if they’re correcting an error I might make – actually I appreciate that when it happens).

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 11:14 PM

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 10:36 PM

Thanks for the compliment!

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 11:15 PM

Oh great. I feel so much better flipping a coin than knowing for sure that I’m going to die./

;)

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 10:48 PM

ROFL!! Ok, ok, my bad – still I can’t help but laugh!

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 11:18 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 11:12 PM

The figures I saw were something on the order of 500,000,000 people infected, equally represented on all seven continents (including antarctic researchers) and of those, anywhere from 50-100 million died. That would place the percentage at 10-20%, though the pandemic was documented for two flu seasons between 1918 and 1920. I’m not sure how reliable my primary sources are, but that sounds plausible.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 11:21 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 8:44 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 8:46 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 8:52 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:25 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:38 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:42 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:58 PM

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 11:12 PM

.
Thank you . . . . . seriously….

Whether this is the “Zaire” variety or not, I’m still (I said this earlier) of the mind that it (the virus) has been “modified” under lab conditions, to being used to create a worldwide ‘pandemic’, that will require a global solution.

I do believe this strain is ‘airborne communicable.’

If I’m proven wrong … GREAT.

There’s just certain things a person would rather be “wrong” about
.
Whether you think I’m NUTS (or worse) isn’t an issue. Most people do, so you’d be in good company.

listens2glenn on October 2, 2014 at 11:27 PM

The figures I saw were something on the order of 500,000,000 people infected, equally represented on all seven continents (including antarctic researchers) and of those, anywhere from 50-100 million died. That would place the percentage at 10-20%, though the pandemic was documented for two flu seasons between 1918 and 1920. I’m not sure how reliable my primary sources are, but that sounds plausible.

gryphon202 on October 2, 2014 at 11:21 PM

Could be – estimates do vary widely. Here’s one example: https://virus.stanford.edu/uda/ Estimates 20 to 40 million died – with a fifth of the world population infected. It says the mortality rate was 2.5% vs. the more “normal” flu mortality rate of less than 0.1%. And of course, the spanish flu hit the 20-40 age group the hardest, where normally flu mortality is primarily in the very old and very young. It’s horrific reading about it.

Here’s another: http://www.flu.gov/pandemic/history/ Cites 50 million died, 20 to 40% of the world wide population infected. It doesn’t give a mortality rate, but world population was supposedly about 1,650,000,000 in 1900, so that would be about 3% of the total population killed – but closer to an 8% mortality rate…

Anyhow, the numbers are all wildly all over the place as you can see, so I’ve no doubt you’ve run across estimates as you note.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 11:40 PM

U

h, yeah. That’s my point. Even if this guy didn’t infect other people, there is a whole group of countries that have sick people that won’t get stopped if they try to get to the U.S. We are not in the clear so long as the disease is still spreading and we aren’t stopping people from coming here from that part of the world.

cptacek on October 2, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Sorry, but you have to start counting the incubation period from the LAST moment they could have been infected, not the first. So that means if their apartment wasn’t sterilized until today (if it’s even been done now), the incubation period must run 21 days from today.

Granted, they could have been infected the first day he showed symptoms – but it’s also possible they weren’t infected until the last contaminated thing they could have contacted was sterilized or removed.

Now gawd knows if they’ll require isolation that way, but that’s the only reasonable way to do it – otherwise you risk the chance that they didn’t pick the infection up immediately, and you end the isolation too soon and right after they develop symptoms – and then where are you? Scr32wed, and you have to start all over determining everyone they contacted, etc. Great way to allow the infection to be spread.

So no one else by the end of this weekend is WAY too soon to say there aren’t any more infected. Unfortunately.

Rational Db8 on October 2, 2014 at 10:58 PM

In theory, yes. But this guy was first admitted last Friday with indeterminate symptoms. He was then readmitted on Sunday. Every day without another symptomatic case is good. The odds are still very much in our favor if there’s not someone else showing symptoms by the end of this weekend.

jim56 on October 3, 2014 at 12:05 AM

If you do nothing else, read this.

Look at the charts, note the differences between countries. Note that this outbreak began in January. Note the difference between incidence (new cases) versus the prevalence (all cases). Much of what is being reported as Alarming Increase(TM) is actually double counting because they are counting both new and existing cases.

Note the difference in case fatality rate among confirmed cases between countries – 28% Sierra Leone, 96% Liberia. Note that Liberia has 2/3 of all cases. What this means is that a) different strains are involved, or more likely, b) Liberia is a soup sandwich when it comes to dealing with this.

Next, 7157 cases in 9 months in a population at risk of over 20 million including areas with population densities equaling that of Miami – airborne, no.

A final note:

Oh, and for what it’s worth, I believe the 1918 spanish flu mortality rate was only about 2.5% – but it was SO widespread that it still managed to kill something like 3% of the world’s population – millions of people.

The vast majority deaths were from complications of the flu, and for which there was no treatment back then, e.g., antibiotics for pneumonia. Using the 1918-19 flu as a model for outbreaks is not a good choice.

Bottom line: Don’t Panic.

F X Muldoon on October 3, 2014 at 8:52 AM

Bottom line: Don’t Panic.

F X Muldoon on October 3, 2014 at 8:52 AM

Regardless of what one thinks is an appropriate level of worry, the government’s handling of this thing isn’t engendering a lot of faith. And you can bet your sweet tuchus that whatever efforts are being made to fight Ebola in the USA are being overseen by the same CDC that is an arm of the Department of Health and Human Services. Cabinet-level, run by President Obama.

gryphon202 on October 3, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Some observations from recent revelations:

1) Since Mr. Duncan lied on his forms in Liberia the only way to avoid a repeat of this situation is all travelers from actively infected countries should be quarantined and tested upon arrival in the U.S. The Government will never have the guts to do that.

2) The government had supplied warning to healthcare facilities to be on the watch. In the first ER visit by Mr. Duncan, he informed them he had been in Liberia. He omitted informatioin that he had direct contact with an Ebola victim. Those receiving the information did fail to note/act on the significance of where he came from.

3) Mr. Duncan’s step daughter gets kudos for realizing the situation and acting. If she had not visited it looks like it might have been much worse as I have heard no indication of any further intended action by those in the apartment.

4) Because of the close contact I’m betting some of the people in the apartment Mr. Duncan was staying in will start showing symptoms. There were 5-6 days he was in the apartment with active symptoms. The step daughter did some sterilizing/cleaning but no one’s indicated whether that was sufficient.

TerryW on October 3, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Trial Atty’s of America:

Libility Ins. Companies who insure Air Lines of America:

??

1. Trial Atty’s : The case of a person on a flight that has on it out of say New York who has Ebola and he flew from Lybira knowing he had Ebola and this person gets Ebola and dies.

Who is lilable. He bought the ticket in good faith that he would not be exposed to Ebola. He is 36 years old and is the head of a high teck start up company worth already say $50 million.

His wife comes to say John Edwards law firm,,, will Edwards law firm take the case?

———

Libility Ins. company say AIG as the back up high libility company
will you ins. United, American Air, etal for the possible libility for allowing Ebola to infect a “in good faith passenger”.

Will the U.S. Goverment have to cover the losses to keep the air line companies in buss once the Trial Atty’s feast on this deal.

questions Obama and his helpless band of commies will never ask….

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 3, 2014 at 1:26 PM

The patient traveling to Texas from Liberia helped a woman into a car and that was how he became infected. What are the chances that he would’ve come in contact with the virus on a fully clothed woman? Did she spit on him, kiss him on the mouth, drool on her clothing? It appears to me as a casual observer that there’s something less direct happening…

stacman on October 2, 2014 at 3:42 PM

“there’s something less direct happening…” and that something is probably prostitution.

Prostitution is damn near an epidemic in most (all?) African country.

I still believe that he was strongly suspicious he had been infected and reasoned that he stood a better chance in an American hospital, which has proven to be the case.

You noticed he didn’t hang around any European countries? That’s because he knew that most European hospitals would have refused him admission.

E9RET on October 3, 2014 at 1:52 PM

I still believe that he was strongly suspicious he had been infected and reasoned that he stood a better chance in an American hospital, which has proven to be the case.

E9RET

That prediction apparently was correct.

BOSS, COWORKERS OF US EBOLA PATIENT: HE KNEW HE HAD EBOLA, US TRIP WAS ‘DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO SURVIVE’

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/03/Boss-Coworkers-of-US-Ebola-Patient-He-Knew-He-Had-Ebola-US-Trip-Was-Desperate-Attempt-to-Survive

E9RET on October 3, 2014 at 2:11 PM

The hospital is trying to absolve itself from messing up by blaming the electronic records software. Evidently the nurse entered the travel information into the record but travel information is not copied (until now) over to the doctors information on the patient.

So doctors and nurses aren’t in the room with the patient at the same time? I have not seen that in my visits to the ER. It would still be the job of the nurse to verbally convey the information but didn’t because Mr. Duncan’s statement did not register.

Hmmm. Electronic records were forced on the health industry by Obamacare.

TerryW on October 3, 2014 at 2:17 PM

That prediction apparently was correct.

BOSS, COWORKERS OF US EBOLA PATIENT: HE KNEW HE HAD EBOLA, US TRIP WAS ‘DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO SURVIVE’

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/03/Boss-Coworkers-of-US-Ebola-Patient-He-Knew-He-Had-Ebola-US-Trip-Was-Desperate-Attempt-to-Survive

E9RET on October 3, 2014 at 2:11 PM

So why didn’t he say he was possibly exposed at the first ER visit? He only said he travelled from Liberia. He also didn’t want to go back to the hospital when his step daughter urged him to. She called 911.

TerryW on October 3, 2014 at 2:22 PM

That prediction apparently was correct.

BOSS, COWORKERS OF US EBOLA PATIENT: HE KNEW HE HAD EBOLA, US TRIP WAS ‘DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO SURVIVE’

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/03/Boss-Coworkers-of-US-Ebola-Patient-He-Knew-He-Had-Ebola-US-Trip-Was-Desperate-Attempt-to-Survive

E9RET on October 3, 2014 at 2:11 PM

That article is a travesty – nothing but rampant speculation, much of what doesn’t even fit with the known facts. For example, he quit his job BEFORE he ever helped the woman into the cab. The Cab driver states that they didn’t know she had Ebola – that she was pregnant and she thought she was having a miscarriage. They tried taking her to something like 5 different hospitals, none of which would take her, so they brought her back home. Plus, getting a visa takes time – there’s no way he could have gotten one in the 3 days between his exposure and his departing flight. And if it was a “desperate attempt to survive” he would have immediately gone to an ER here before he even got symptoms and told them he was exposed to Ebola and thought he had it – or at the very least said so the day he first had symptoms, but he apparently only said he was from Liberia, never mentioned Ebola.

So pretty much nothing in that article fits with what’s known to have occurred – or even with anything that would make sense. It’s just sheer speculation.

Rational Db8 on October 3, 2014 at 3:33 PM

CDC, Public Health Service, et al

Yet even more government agencies we can add to the list of billions upon billions of dollars taken from us to merely support their existence (and probably act as fronts for what amounts to money-laundering operations for pols and their friends), with really nothing to show for it.

The only reason these diseases don’t take off over here is simply that not enough infected people actually made the trip across the Shining Seas.

The only reason we haven’t been invaded by hostile forces is because they’re more broke and dysfunctional than we are.

The government doesn’t supply even a small percentage of the valuable services they say they provide.

If bad stuff doesn’t happen to us as it does elsewhere, it’s sheer luck.

Dr. ZhivBlago on October 3, 2014 at 8:12 PM

Yet even more government agencies we can add to the list of billions upon billions of dollars taken from us to merely support their existence (and probably act as fronts for what amounts to money-laundering operations for pols and their friends), with really nothing to show for it.

Dr. ZhivBlago on October 3, 2014 at 8:12 PM

That’s how I feel about breast cancer awareness. How can a group of supposed scientists milk the charities for 50 years, and have absolutely nothing to show for it? They can clone an animal or human, but can’t tackle breast cancer?

Back to the eBola issue. I want clarification of bodily fluids since it seems too many people are coming in contact with vomit, and fluids being splashed as was the case with the NBC cameraman who was apparently wearing hazmat gear. Does it include sweat, so brushing against someone could transmit it? If so, why wouldn’t our lame-ass president not stop flights into the US from crowded terminals?

stacman on October 5, 2014 at 2:09 AM

stacman on October 5, 2014 at 2:09 AM

.
B I N G O !
.
I’m still of the mind that this “strain” we’re dealing with, can commute airborne . . . . . maybe limited to shorter distances, than other airborne illnesses, but too many medical personnel are contracting this, in spite of all the safety measures being taken.

listens2glenn on October 5, 2014 at 3:13 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5