It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


West Africa Ebola Death Toll Accelerates to More than 1,900: WHO, Sep 3 2014

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 03:19 PM
It's not on the WHO website. Yet.

Reuters) - More than 1,900 people have died in the world's worst outbreak of Ebola in West Africa, the head of the World Health Organization said on Wednesday, marking a major acceleration in fatalities from just over 1,500 last week.

Margaret Chan told a news conference in Washington that 3,500 confirmed or probable cases of Ebola have been reported in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia as of this week. The death toll from this outbreak is now higher than in all the previous epidemics since the disease was first detected in 1976.


I wonder if WHO now only releasing updates every 4-5 days is part of a plan to not scare us even more. The last update for W Africa was released on Aug 28. They lost track...

It's a dramatic increase in death cases, on Aug28 the official death toll was 1,552. So 400 more deaths in only 1 week?

Also MSF/Doctors Without Borders said "the world is losing the battle to contain Ebola". We are pretty screwed, aren't we?

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 03:34 PM
I woudln't follow those numbers too carefully...especially because they are probably much higher and much "scarier" in reality... But i dont know that it is time to panic and say "we are screwed". I personally am more worried about the panic that would ensue, atleast here in the states, and the govt's attempt to subdue said panic... than the virus itself. Even if we dont have confirmed cases im sure ERs here are already swamped with people who think they have it who have never even left their hometown... But the low mortality rate coupled with the fact that doctors who have spent their whole lives taking precautions against this very virus are some how contracting it and dying is concerning. I just wonder if there is information they are purposely keeping from us as to not incite panic, or if they truly dont know. Both of which are worrisome

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 03:39 PM
a reply to: negue

It's looking that way.

Today I was reading about the cases in Nigeria. No doubt in my mind the situation is going to get much worse there.

Ebola in Rivers, ECOWAS Official May Face Manslaughter Charges

Read his story and you will see why I think this.
edit on 3-9-2014 by loam because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 03:40 PM
a reply to: itswhatev

"low mortality rate"?

I didn't state we should panic, I was only looking for an answer to "we are screwed". For the record, I think we should panic. But the "good" panic, as in take precautions, stock up&prepare for an emergency, and follow the news trying to decipher the truth.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 03:45 PM
a reply to: negue

Low mortality rate in the sense that usually its fatal up to about 90% from what i understand... and this particular outbreak ive seen quoted between 47% and 65%. The less lethal it is the more likely hood that it will spread from my understanding. The reason I was always told that ebola would never become an epidemic was because it killed itself out too quickly. So yes, that bothers me.

"we are screwed" isnt a question. BUt i believe i understand what you are saying, Expect the worst but hope for the best.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 03:49 PM
a reply to: itswhatev

Oh yes, low mortality rate compared to the other outbreaks. In itself, the 50% survival rate looks scary to me.

The entire question was "We are pretty screwed, aren't we? ".

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 04:01 PM
a reply to: negue

Yes, and here's why.

To get this right, the world has to fall somewhere between panic and complacency. In other words, fat chance in hell. When can you recall anytime in recent history where an international response was soundly coordinated between the world's nations to solve some problem?

Hopefully, we'll get lucky and the virus will resolve itself. Short of that, things are going to get much worse for the world, before it gets better, imo.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 04:20 PM
a reply to: itswhatev

The less lethal it is the more likely hood that it will spread from my understanding.

Your understanding is flawed. As the virus mutates and evolves, it will trade some of it's lethality for ease of transmission, this is an area of scientific study:

The trade-off hypothesis suggests that there is a trade off between how long the virus or other pathogen is able to persist in its host and the rate at which the virus or other pathogen can be transmitted. The trade off hypothesis suggests that virulence will evolve to a level at which virulence and transmission is balanced so as to maximize the spread of the virus.

Virulence Evolution

There is evidence that the hypothesis is correct:

Viral lines with the higher enforced rate of infectious transmission evolved higher virulence and higher rates of virus production. These results support the trade-off model for the evolution of virulence.

Virulence evolution in a virus obeys a trade-off.

The less lethal it becomes, the easier it is to catch.
edit on 3-9-2014 by jadedANDcynical because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 04:51 PM

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 05:04 PM
a reply to: negue

We got 2 major issues right now.

ISIS and Ebola.

Ebola on the rise and more threatening to me at this time. ISIS should be dealt with quite swiftly.

What bothers me a lot about Ebola is that there are many Africans trying to get to Europe on boats and many do make it to Italy!
edit on CDTWed, 03 Sep 2014 17:56:08 -0500u3005x108x1 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 05:43 PM
So on Aug 26 the death toll was at 1552, 7 days later the total is upwards of 1900. Therefore in 137 days since Mar 19, 21% of the total deaths occurred in the past 7 days. If that is true, then this is the point in which the virus starts to grow exponentially. That being said there is really two scenarios here: assuming these totals that are available to us are correct, the issue is being completely overblown OR the totals are being misrepresented. If the former is true then one still has a better chance of being killed in a car accident than by Ebola. I guess it just depends on if the number of +1900 is correct

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 05:51 PM
They need to start isolating west Africa from NON essential travel. Allow doctors and supply flights in but stop tourism, immigration and business flights.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 06:16 PM
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I thought so too. While seeing less deaths is good, it's also bad. What a terrible thing to say...

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 06:17 PM

edit on 9/3/2014 by whatnext21 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 06:23 PM
a reply to: whatnext21

Ebola - my visual charts & projections based on WHO data

Ikonklast has put a lot of work into this thread and has been validated by credentialed scientists.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 06:32 PM
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Thats exactly what i was saying. You say my "understanding" is flawed, then proceed to post the very information i base my "understanding" on. The less lethal it is, the easier it spreads... which is why that specifically concerns me.

And to Negue, no it's not horrible for me to say that. I , in no way, implied that it was a good thing. I actually agree that this is something that everyone should be completely concerned about, just dont think it's time to "panic". Though your definition of panic and mine are undoubtedly two different things. (because i dont think one could ever panic in a "good" way. )
edit on 3-9-2014 by itswhatev because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 06:37 PM
a reply to: itswhatev

You are correct, apologies for my misunderstanding of what you wrote.

I don't know how I mistook that, I did somehow think you meant the opposite.

I've never advocated panic, but I do have a high level of concern.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 06:42 PM
a reply to: itswhatev

I blame the language barrier
I'm not a native English speaker. Besides that, it's way past my bed time.

I was not talking about you when I said "what a horrible thing to say". And I'm sorry if it came out like that, I didn't mean it. I was just saying it's horrible to think about how a smaller death % (while a good thing by itself) could also mean the virus can now spread more easily. Fewer deaths could be worse than more deaths.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 06:51 PM
not a good start,,

"UK Deputy High Commissioner Slumps, Dies at Lagos Airport"
03 Sep 2014

"The British Deputy High Commissioner to Nigeria, Ambassador Peter Carter Leslie, slumped and died Tuesday from a possible heart attack on arrival at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Lagos."

bad Omen.

posted on Sep, 3 2014 @ 08:07 PM
What?? only 1900 people??
I thought this thing was killing millions of blacks!!

You'all do realise, that the winter Flu and common Colds kill anywhere between 25,000 and 35,000 (est) people per year in the USA alone, and hospitalise 200,000....imagine the Worldwide figure just for the flu and cold.

The common Flu and cold is just as deadly as this ebola it seems.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in