Ebola, inside information

Info concerning Houston was on Breitbart yesterday.

www.breitbart.com...

At the bottom of the article it says another patient had malaria.

Obey also confirmed that another patient who was being monitored in Harris County turned out to have malaria.
The patient of concern was admitted to the North Cypress Medical Center hospital on Monday and has now been released.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Trust me, I've railed against all the incarnations of Mr. Schnitzel that have appeared on these boards over the years I've been here.

I will give as many details as I can.

Source is a relative who is a nurse (has been for a long time, and is well versed in this virus in particular) and is a patient in one of the few hospitals in the country that does have the facilities to deal with this virus.

As one can imagine, this topic is on many lips in the hospital.

It is this person's opinion that the virus is, and has been, transmissible prior to onset of symptoms.

That is the bigges lie we are being told.

So the cdc said you couldn't spread Ebola until you had symptoms?
I was under the assumption that's they way all viruses spread? that you didn't have to be symptomatic to spread them.
That's why they spread so quickly, maybe I'm not understanding.

Two months ago, news is reporting around 3000 dead total "Help Help it's out of control"

One month ago, news is reporting around 3000 dead total "Help Help it's out of control"

Three weeks ago "The bodies are piling up on the streets" About 3000 reported deaths total on the news

Two weeks, "The world cannot contain the outbreak! (news reports around 3000 dead total)

Today, "Out of control!" News reports around 3000 dead....total

What the $%$$ ??? Why are they capping it at 3000 still? I don't understand. Is it still around 3000 dead?

How are we supposed to process this off-set information?

Panic? Well according to the msm there hasn't been any jump in the numbers! Oh wait yes there has! Um no, still around 3000, it isn't spreading!


????????


Signed confused and getting pissed off.

a reply to: 2gd2btru

Yeah, saw that story.

This does not relate to that of which I was informed.

originally posted by: ikonoklast

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: ikonoklast

So, what's the worse case scenario worldwide, based on extrapolation of these charts?

Ebola spreads exponentially. From a single case, it only has to double less than 33 times to exceed the total population of Earth. So the worst case scenario is that everyone on the planet who does not have natural immunity or cannot isolate themselves would catch it.

Between 50-90% of those who catch Ebola die. 70.8% is believed to be the most accurate current figure based on known clinical data. But that's for people who received medical treatment where the cases were followed from start to finish. In a worst case scenario it would eventually reach a point where most cases could not obtain medical care and the death rate would likely worsen.

The charts are based on reported cases and deaths from WHO. This outbreak has already doubled about 13 times in about 10 months. It only has to double at most 20 more times to have doubled 33 times. If it continues doubling at the current pace (doubling again 13 times every 10 months), that will take a little more than 15 months, which would be before the end of January 2016.

Long before then, economies and social systems would collapse in pretty much total chaos. Food and other necessities would be in short supply. A worst case scenario with Ebola would likely be the end of this civilization as we know it.

I'm really hoping we can avoid such a worst case scenario, though I am not seeing much reason to expect that. To avoid this, you have to bring the growth down to where there is an average of less than 1 new case from current cases (R0 less than 1). Then it stops doubling and slowly dies out.

I only know of 3 ways to do that, but perhaps there are more:

1. Quarantine/isolation

2. A treatment or vaccine that can be produced in sufficient quantity

3. Luck or divine intervention

The longer the epidemic grows, the more difficult #1 becomes because there are too many people infected, and over a wider area. At least one of the top Ebola experts in the world believes #2 is unlikely to be achievable in time and that belief in miracle technology being invented and produced in time makes it less likely enough will be done for #1 to be achieved in time. As for #3, some believe the Spanish Flu epidemic only ended because that virus mutated enough to no longer be so deadly to humans.

Is the recent activity at the Georgia Guidestones related to this?

Probably only whoever did the recent activity at the Georgia Guidestones knows the answer to that. But it is interesting.

A worst case scenario with Ebola could potentially bring the population of the world down to 500 million or less.

Thanks for an excellent response. I was worried the answer would be something along those lines, no big surprise though if you understand the basics of exponential growth.

Do you have some formal experience/training in epidemiology?

a reply to: canucks555

i don't know where you read that but 2 months ago the death toll was MUCH lower. it has consistently been just under half of all reported cases. at the beginning of september there were 1800 deaths out of 3400 cases. now there are over 8000 cases and about 3400 deaths.

you can follow the weekly update counts here:

www.cdc.gov...

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

What I've been waiting for is a straight answer to "how persistent is this virus on dry surfaces?". The Spaniards killing that patient's dog, bodes ill, indeed. There may be something simple we can do once we know what this persistence level of the virus, is. I just hope its not anything like Mersa.

originally posted by: Xaphan
Everybody needs to calm down. Scientists have found that this is curable with home treatment.

MOD EDIT

You're kidding, right?

originally posted by: Xaphan
Everybody needs to calm down. Scientists have found that this is curable with home treatment.

MOD EDIT

You inject yourself with bleach and after you are dead we can agree this is completely insane!

a reply to: canucks555

Globally, the latest numbers are:

8033 reported cases (8034 with the nurse in Spain)
3879 reported deaths

You can follow it by going to this thread.

Bishop

originally posted by: drwill
a reply to: ikonoklast
Your comments are superior to every announcement by the CDC.

Thank you, I really appreciate that. I think some of the information the CDC has provided dangerously minimizes the risk in most people's eyes. That has led to how officials and even medical personnel in Texas have handled things. The level of ignorance displayed there horrifies me. If there are no additional cases as a result, it will only be because of luck or a miracle.

Thank goodness for ATS. I think the majority of people following the Ebola threads here are far better informed about Ebola than many of the people actively dealing with it. And that's truly scary.

a reply to: Enderdog

What about taking a few drops of Lugol's solution. I take 5 drops in a coffee and I had given it to some people showing symptoms of flu/cold and they felt relief in just 30 minutes

a reply to: angryhulk
Ozone might work wonders too. I have a ozonizer installed in my house water line. I bought it after an extended research on the subject and ozone kills everything on contact. Also makes tap water taste much much better.

Dallas deputy tested negative
abcnews.go.com...

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

You're welcome. No, I am not an epidemiologist or a doctor. I am a retired engineer (amongst other experience). I just know how to read data charts from WHO, manually copy the data into tables in Excel, make charts, and use Excel's functions to create exponential projections from known data and graph them.

Anyone who knows how to do that could create the same charts and would see the same things. You could even just plot the data on semi-log paper (x-axis linear, y-axis logarithmic) by hand.

I've been doing such charts for Ebola for about 2 months now, and have created tables of data going back to the presumed first case in December 2013. You can see all of the charts created from the beginning of August to now in the Ebola Charts thread. You will even see comparison's of the projections I've made with projections from some of the world's leading epidemiologists and from WHO and the CDC since they have been doing it now too. Essentially, all of the projections show pretty much the same thing.

I've learned a lot about Ebola in the process. Things are all too obvious after cranking through the numbers and charts over and over. The rate of growth is a pretty straight line when the y-axis is logarithmic because it is growing exponentially. It slowly and inexorably doubles at a pretty consistent rate. Hopefully the charts help make this obvious for others too.

I'm surprised no one has brought up the Spanish Flu in here. Ever wonder why it's called "Spanish"? The media post Great War was censored in the same exact manner we are seeing today. They would not allow reports of the flu occurring from the actual epicenter to be published (the trenches), and instead they painted Spain as a scapegoat in order to make people assume that it originated and was close to containment there.

This illness was very international and in full swing by the time proper reports were allowed. All in order to save the kingdoms they've built and to ensure economies stayed as pretty as possible until the last possible moment. Of course, more people died from this negligence than in the entire war where these savages sent their young and brightest to slaughter.

I wouldn't bet that history forgets to repeats itself.

originally posted by: NoRulesAllowed
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE animals. 100%.

But in this case...we're not sure whether dogs can transmit the disease and there is indications they in fact DO. It is my understanding some dogs in the past had tested positive for the virus. We're talking Ebola here, a deadly virus. I really don't think they had another choice here ;(

You're missing the point. Either the dog was exhibiting signs of Ebola and we were not told that or he was not. If he was not, for both humane and scientific reasons he should have been quarantined and observed instead of just killed.

i would like to know if you dont mind...