It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Outbreak of Deadly Ebola Virus Is Feared in Congo Republic

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2005 @ 05:52 AM
link   


"JOHANNESBURG, May 13 - Nine people have died in the Congo Republic since late April from what appears to be an outbreak of the Ebola virus, the second episode of a deadly hemorrhagic fever to strike the region this year, a spokesman for the World Health Organization said Friday."

"Unlike officials in Angola, who allowed the Marburg outbreak to rage for weeks and possibly months, health authorities in the Congo Republic have moved rapidly to investigate and curb the disease. Mr. Thompson said the quick response suggested that the nation's health authorities were learning how to deal with such episodes on their own."

www.nytimes.com...

This is getting really scary now. How long until these "virus" make it to mainland Europe of the US? Perhaps this area of Africa needs to be "sanitized" in some way.




posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Not sure what you mean by sanitize. I don't think there is really any thing other than what they are currently doing to try to keep this isolated. I have been following this story closely, as I find it extremely scary. I do agree with you, I believe it's only a matter of time before it spreads further. It only takes one person on an airplane, ship, etc before this thing could become a worldwide problem I believe.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   
This is really much more of a problem that the media is covering it. This is potentially a worldwide pandemic. Can the world afford another slow motion reaction to a pandemic like it did to HIV? HIV is slow death, ebola and marburg as hideously quick.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:23 AM
link   
There is definitely barely any media coverage. Why do you think that is? We were inundated with SARS and bird flu coverage, and I would think it is far less deadly than Ebola, and Marburg. Do you think because it is only in Africa, rather than Asia, or a European country, or do you think because they really don't want us all to know how scary this thing actually could be?

Just curious for some opinions....



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   
I read this book, and it scared me terribly. I recommend this book, as it is a TRUE story.


"The Hot Zone" by Richard Preston


The following are discriptions from the publisher and critics.


FROM THE PUBLISHER
A highly infectious, deadly virus from the central African rain forest suddenly appears in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. There is no cure. In a few days 90 percent of its victims are dead. A secret military SWAT team of soldiers and scientists is mobilized to stop the outbreak of this exotic "hot" virus. The Hot Zone tells this dramatic story, giving a hair-raising acccount of the appearance of rare and lethal viruses and their "crashes" into the human race. Shocking, frightening, and impossible to ignore, The Hot Zone proves that truth really is scarier than fiction.


FROM THE CRITICS
Publishers Weekly

Far more infectious than AIDS, filoviruses (thread viruses) are relentless killer machines that consume a human body in days, causing a gruesome death. Symptoms include liquefying flesh, spurts of blood, black vomit and brain sludge. Outbreaks of the Ebola filovirus devasted Sudan and Zaire in 1976. And in 1989 Philippine monkeys in a Reston, Va., research lab, found to be infected with Ebola, were the target of a U.S. Army-led biohazard task force that decontaminated the lab, exterminating hundreds of monkeys to prevent the possible airborne spread of the disease to humans.

This is something that cannot be ignored.
Faeryland



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by frogs453
There is definitely barely any media coverage. Why do you think that is? We were inundated with SARS and bird flu coverage, and I would think it is far less deadly than Ebola, and Marburg. Do you think because it is only in Africa, rather than Asia, or a European country, or do you think because they really don't want us all to know how scary this thing actually could be?

Just curious for some opinions....


Marburg was first dicovered in a town in Germany. I think thats weird that it in Africa now.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Marburg was discovered in 1967 in Germany, but it originated in African Green Monkeys..



Marburg is a filovirus that was discovered in Marburg, Germany in 1967. The virus originated in East Africa from a shipment of African Green Monkeys. The virus jumped into the human species and infected 31 people.



I was curious as to why there is not much media coverage, although the above article does state that there is only a 25% mortality rate, so it is not as high as I originally thought. A combination of Ebola and Marburg at the same time does seem a bit weird though.

Marburg



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by frogs453
There is definitely barely any media coverage. Why do you think that is? We were inundated with SARS and bird flu coverage, and I would think it is far less deadly than Ebola, and Marburg. Do you think because it is only in Africa, rather than Asia, or a European country, or do you think because they really don't want us all to know how scary this thing actually could be?

Just curious for some opinions....


You are absolutely correct. The cold fact is, for the most part, the world does not view Africa as a worthwhile cause when it comes to major efforts in life preservation. I know that there are constant efforts in certain regions of the continent, but it is obvious that the efforts could be increased.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I am aware of the 'story" of marburg virus, but are you aware that Marburg Germany is a very large bio-research area? Coincidence?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xenersys
I am aware of the 'story" of marburg virus, but are you aware that Marburg Germany is a very large bio-research area? Coincidence?



I think I read that it was a lab tech, researcher, or something of that sort that originally contracted the virus in 1967, but will have to google it. I see that now there is a news submission regarding the spread of this outbreak.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by frogs453
There is definitely barely any media coverage. Why do you think that is? We were inundated with SARS and bird flu coverage, and I would think it is far less deadly than Ebola, and Marburg. Do you think because it is only in Africa, rather than Asia, or a European country, or do you think because they really don't want us all to know how scary this thing actually could be?

Just curious for some opinions....


I would think ebola doesn't/hasn't gotten the media coverage of avian flu and SARS because it's really not as much of a threat as SARS could have been and avian flu definitely has the potential to be.

Influenza is airborne, and extremely easy to catch between humans (once it's a human strain). Ebola, because of it's speedy incubation period and high mortality isn't such a risk for infection. People die so quickly (and due to the majority of outbreaks occuring in remote areas of African countires) it would be hard for it be moved into a large population where it would definitely wreak havoc. The mortality rate and speed of death is actually a good thing are good things in relation to it being a global threat; also, it's not airborne, so it's harder to catch. It's generally spread through improper handling of the deceased, or consuming infected animals.




new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join