Ebola Mutating: Sustained H2H Transmission

a reply to: new_here

S& ...From March - July I was pushing hard for attention for this epidemic - then, when it finally happened and people started freaking out, I went into "prevent panic" mode. Now... Things are NOT looking good. Even Britain is starting to batten the hatches. Which means the situation is much, much worse than anyone is admitting - even CDC's Friedan who said, "Things are much worse than we know," or whatever he said.

Sustained H2H transmission is really, really bad - however it's happening. And if 5 researchers can die while working on Ebola, those of us without the gear are pretty much screwed.

Travel ban to Ebola affected countries, UK officials say

The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office says all travel to Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia should be avoided - unless essential, due to the Ebola outbreak.

British Airways has suspended flights to Sierra Leone and Liberia and other airlines are taking similar measures.

Such flight restrictions may make it increasingly hard for people working in these areas to leave, the FCO warns.

So, if fatality is going down, even if the virus is spreading more, wouldn't that be a good thing? I mean, granted ideally, it would just burn out or be stopped. But, if it's going to be a pandemic, a less lethal one would be preferable to a more lethal one, right? Especially if the symptoms are more mild. Certainly, nobody WANTS the virus, it's a bad time even with mild symptoms, but if it doesn't kill you....

a reply to: Mr Headshot

Depends on if it was nature or man who started it.
If it was nature then at least we know we have a good chance.

If it was man who started it then we have to hope they are happy with the end result or we could face a second or third wave of other things with zero chance of containing what ever they use.

History tells us it could be either.

originally posted by: Mr Headshot
So, if fatality is going down, even if the virus is spreading more, wouldn't that be a good thing? I mean, granted ideally, it would just burn out or be stopped. But, if it's going to be a pandemic, a less lethal one would be preferable to a more lethal one, right? Especially if the symptoms are more mild. Certainly, nobody WANTS the virus, it's a bad time even with mild symptoms, but if it doesn't kill you....

Let's say it drops to 30% fatality as it spreads globally.

Current pipulation is a tad over 7.2 billion.

That leaves us around 2.2 Billion dead.

How is that ok?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Not saying it's ok, I'm just saying it's preferable to 5 Billion or something.

Obviously, the worst case scenario is that it's just as deadly, but takes longer to kill you, or becomes readily infectious before symptoms manifest.

originally posted by: Mr Headshot
So, if fatality is going down, even if the virus is spreading more, wouldn't that be a good thing? I mean, granted ideally, it would just burn out or be stopped. But, if it's going to be a pandemic, a less lethal one would be preferable to a more lethal one, right? Especially if the symptoms are more mild. Certainly, nobody WANTS the virus, it's a bad time even with mild symptoms, but if it doesn't kill you....

No - it's not a good thing if a virus' fatality drops from 78% to 52% while it becomes more transmissible. Even a 5% fatality rate is horrific. btw - lower fatality is pretty much always linked with greater transmissibility.

As joho99 says, "Depends on if it was nature or man who started it. If it was nature then at least we know we have a good chance." ....Ebola was known NOT to mutate much at all - now this one is showing 300 mutations and 3 new strains! (New strains popping up is bad even if the "strains" aren't really strains but new "subclades.")

....Also interesting, it was assumed that this ZEBOV strain had been in West Africa for a very long time - but this study shows it's only been there for about 10 years, and only just sped up it's mutation rate.

And again -

....the longer it's circulating in people, the more chances it will have to randomly come up with a mutation that it will find beneficial — possibly to the detriment of human health.

"You never want to give a virus that kind of opportunity," ....

a reply to: rickymouse

The virus has to be able to survive outside the host until taken in by another host. That is why the mutation is scary. Its learning to survive longer and longer each time. Sooner or later it will go airborne and then become a much bigger problem than it is now.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: rickymouse

The virus has to be able to survive outside the host until taken in by another host. That is why the mutation is scary. Its learning to survive longer and longer each time. Sooner or later it will go airborne and then become a much bigger problem than it is now.

Everyone seems to concentrate on if it becomes airborne but that is irrelevant if it reaches a critical number and can survive outside humans for a reasonable number of days plus other transmission methods example semen and breast milk.

Imagine a million people leaving fluids all over the place.

That is possible if it is getting help.

a reply to: joho99

If it hits the Porn Industry,,well,,someone is u know,,,

example semen and breast

Let alone the general pop.

originally posted by: BobAthome
a reply to: joho99

If it hits the Porn Industry,,well,,someone is u know,,,

example semen and breast

Let alone the general pop.

The porn industry would be decimated the Internet could even grind to a halt lol

a reply to: BobAthome

21 day courting just might katch hold,,,21 Days no bodily fluid contact,, yes that includes kissing,, and close, really close hugging,,21 Days.

called Courting.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Yay! Next up....airborne mutation, unless of course that has already happened and we just are not being told about it. Get ready for this to hit in a large city near you!

Weren't you the one saying that it was going to spread like wildfire in Atlanta because according to you they didn't take proper precautions? How did that little doom porn prediction work out for you???

You, and the OP who has made several threads on Ebola, just sound like you WANT a huge outbreak in a large American city to happen. Maybe because you need something exciting to happen in your life...maybe so you can say "I told you so"...whatever the reason is...it is really kind of sick.

The OP if FILLED with incorrect information...this outbreak didn't originate from HUMANS...a human got it from an animal that was a natural reservoir...JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER OUTBREAK. Difference here was that they didn't recognize it as Ebola quick enough to stop health care workers that treated that person from traveling to other health care centers to infect others.

And the whole BS about it is "mutating twice as fast now" is just pure doom porn...along with your "maybe it is already airborne and we aren't being told".

This outbreak is a serious situation in Africa right now...many people are dying...whole families are dying...quit trying to use it as your own grotesque source for entertainment.

Just stop.

a reply to: kruphix

whole BS about it is "mutating twice as fast now"

should have stopped when u were ahead.

its 3 times not twice.

a reply to: kruphix

his outbreak is a serious situation in Africa right now...many people are dying...whole families are dying.


whole families are dying
actually it seems like most of the survivors are children,,young teens,
as far as whole families,,then that is significant from a scientific view if correct,,are there whole infected families survivig as well??

If there are then the statement whole families would be sinificant,,unless u made it up,, then ,,,well wasted time and effort.

a reply to: BobAthome

Have you got creditable links to the actual stats on age ranges and death and infection?

Scary stuff indeed..

a reply to: soficrow

And if 5 researchers can die while working on Ebola, those of us without the gear are pretty much screwed.

This.
They KNEW the dangers associated with working with it... or DID they? It's one or it's the other. Ok, I guess it could be both.

1. If they knew the dangers of catching it on the job, either they got sloppy and lackadaisical with protection protocol (but 5 of them, really? Knowing the risk?) ...or they made deadly mistakes that caused a breach in their 'armor.' (Again-- 5 of them, really?)

2. Perhaps it is more infectious than they knew-- even more so than their best efforts to err on the side of caution (because I'd like to believe that researchers 'respect' this pathogen enough to take every necessary precaution possible!)

It's hard for me to believe (Option #1) that five of them got sloppy and lackadaisical. The stakes are just too high to snub protocol. It's equally hard to believe 5 suffered from a breach of their protective garb (if so, it is not durable enough to be reliable, clearly.)

No, my instincts tell me there is more to it than we know, than the experts know (or will divulge.) Reluctantly, I choose Door #2 in this sick game: The strain is/became more infectious, more easily transmitted, than those five researchers imagined. More infectious even beyond their best efforts to err on the side of caution, as anyone would, who has knowledge of Ebola and a desire to live.

What are your thoughts on the circumstances of their death, sofi? (Sorry if it's earlier in the thread... I haven't caught up!)

originally posted by: new_here
a reply to: soficrow

And if 5 researchers can die while working on Ebola, those of us without the gear are pretty much screwed.

This.
They KNEW the dangers associated with working with it... or DID they? It's one or it's the other. Ok, I guess it could be both.

1. If they knew the dangers of catching it on the job, either they got sloppy and lackadaisical with protection protocol (but 5 of them, really? Knowing the risk?) ...or they made deadly mistakes that caused a breach in their 'armor.' (Again-- 5 of them, really?)

2. Perhaps it is more infectious than they knew-- even more so than their best efforts to err on the side of caution (because I'd like to believe that researchers 'respect' this pathogen enough to take every necessary precaution possible!)

It's hard for me to believe (Option #1) that five of them got sloppy and lackadaisical. The stakes are just too high to snub protocol. It's equally hard to believe 5 suffered from a breach of their protective garb (if so, it is not durable enough to be reliable, clearly.)

No, my instincts tell me there is more to it than we know, than the experts know (or will divulge.) Reluctantly, I choose Door #2 in this sick game: The strain is/became more infectious, more easily transmitted, than those five researchers imagined. More infectious even beyond their best efforts to err on the side of caution, as anyone would, who has knowledge of Ebola and a desire to live.

What are your thoughts on the circumstances of their death, sofi? (Sorry if it's earlier in the thread... I haven't caught up!)

Or perhaps they was intentionally infected and made to look sloppy.

1 is a accident 2 is a coincidence 3 seems incompetent 5 seems intentional if you want to remove the people who could help stop the spread.


people seem to be skirting round it like other humans could not be capable of mass killing when history tells us otherwise

I think we are not being told as much as they know . I am keeping a careful eye on it to see when the first confirmed case happens in the "Western World". At this point I think it would be wise to stock up on food , medical and nececsities and limit exposure as much as possible . It is better to be prepared than to wake up one morning and having the symptoms .

I was never worried about the swineflu ,and so on but this gives me the creeps .

armakirais

a reply to: armakirais

Stock up now you can just eat it later because best case scenario you saved some cash because food went up.