Did Dr. Brantly REALLY have Ebola??

Something's just weird about this entire case. He states himself he started feeling ill three days after dropping off his family at the airport to return to the states. He was sick for over a week in Liberia before he was given a transfusion of Ebola-survivor blood and got 'miraculously better' overnight. Then he was returned to Emory Hospital in Atlanta where he was put in isolation for another 3 weeks. He surprised everyone by walking off the ambulance rather than being carried on a stretcher, even after a long and doubtlessly tiring flight. So at least four weeks in all of illness and yet he didn't die, when it would seem from what I know that Africans are dying of this within days of presenting with illness. One description by a doctor said, 'they arrive in the morning weak but walking, confused by evening, dead by the next day' so it appears to kill rather quickly.

Some things that make me suspicious from the link below's several videos:

A close up photo is shown of him with full scrubs on, looking worried but with no evidence of the scleral injection (red eyes) that is one of the first symptoms of Ebola. I'm presuming this photo was taken in the states and not earlier in Liberia while he was still working but that's unclear.

At the 30 second mark in the first video, there are two gentlemen escorting him down the hallway to give his remarks - they are both wearing earpieces/Bluetooth communicators and look like Secret Service agents - why would that be necessary in the hospital environment, with a patient awaiting discharge, even with the press on hand?? Body guards? Who paid for that and why??

He at NO TIME looks ill at all. In fact he looks awfully pale for someone who just spent lots of weeks (months?) in Africa, but other than that looks surprisingly hale and hearty for someone who was 'described by his colleagues in grave condition' at any time in the last three weeks. I dunno about you, but when I've had the flu, I look and feel like hell for weeks afterwards, and I'm not in any mood to smile broadly, give heartfelt speeches, testimony to Congress or testimonials, either. He's acting like he's sure he's not contagious in the least, and that there can be no doubt about that. If I were him, I'd have doubts and would be more circumspect, especially with regards to family members. Remember, this isn't the flu, it's Ebola, a not terribly understood disease and one which he knows as well as anyone can be horrifically lethal.

He is said now to have 'no Ebola virus in his blood', which I also find rather suspicious. How is it possible to be in grave condition from Ebola and a few weeks later to declare unequivocally that 'there's no Ebola virus in his blood' even when it's been said from other sources that the bodily fluids will retain communicability for many more weeks afterwards? We still haven't found the animal vector that hides Ebola in the wild, and yet they're sure about every last cell in this guy's body after a (proven?) infection? Maybe survivors are the ones who become the vectors, it's not like that much study has been done on the subject in Africa with the survivors there, over time.

Last but maybe not least is the extreme amount of religious commentary, with lots of warm fuzzies about thanking God for his recovery, and all the millions of people praying for him, etc. Religious propaganda, in a news report???? What the heck is going on here? Why does this feel like a propaganda psyop and not a real illness that he almost died from? Why have we heard nothing about his blood or Whitebol's blood being used to quickly make more antibodies with, if it was so successful?

news source

These are very good questions. I will enjoy reading the possibilities.

a reply to: signalfire

Ya, there is definitely something fishy to all of this. Why haven't passengers been screened from Liberia and other African nations until today. Flights were cutoff in the Ukraine and Israel over the summer, and Ebola has killed thousands and just now they are screening passengers?? The media is also downplaying the virus on most outlets I have watched..."it isn't contagious through the air" "one infected only affects two on average vs TB that infects up to 18"...bottom line is that it has a 70-80% mortality rate and an incubation period of 21 days. There could me many more infected than realized right now, that combined with poverty is how # hit the fan in Africa. Lets hope this man did not have a mutated version of this virus. Good work identifying some fishy evidence. A lot of valid ?'s to ask. S&F

a reply to: Iamthatbish


there was an article today, he is the same blood type as the news reporter and they are going to give the reporter a transfusion of the docs blood for the ebola antibodies

a reply to: research100

I'm not so sure I would sign up to get blood from a survivor. Here's a little tidbit from the WHO website:

who.int

People remain infectious as long as their blood and body fluids, including semen and breast milk, contain the virus. Men who have recovered from the disease can still transmit the virus through their semen for up to 7 weeks after recovery from illness.

a reply to: research100
That's good to know. Sucks for me being AB negative, I will just have to remain Ebola free!

a reply to: signalfire

Brantly received his medicine before getting on the plane for America:

The ZMapp vials, stored at subzero temperatures, reached the hospital in Liberia where Brantly and Writebol were being treated Thursday morning. Doctors were instructed to allow the serum to thaw naturally without any additional heat. It was expected that it would be eight to 10 hours before the medicine could be given, according to a source familiar with the process.
Brantly asked that Writebol be given the first dose because he was younger and he thought he had a better chance of fighting it, and she agreed. However, as the first vial was still thawing, Brantly's condition took a sudden turn for the worse.
Brantly began to deteriorate and developed labored breathing. He told his doctors he thought he was dying, according to a source with firsthand knowledge of the situation.

Knowing his dose was still frozen, Brantly asked if he could have Writebol's now-thawed medication. It was brought to his room and administered through an IV. Within an hour of receiving the medication, Brantly's condition dramatically improved. He began breathing easier; the rash over his trunk faded away. One of his doctors described the events as "miraculous."

By the next morning, Brantly was able to take a shower on his own before getting on a specially designed Gulfstream air ambulance jet to be evacuated to the United States.

www.cnn.com...

For additional information:

How Ebola spread out of control.

Check the comments section as well. There is some information that was misrepresented in the media, or simply mixed up, probably through broken telephone.

originally posted by: AnonymousCitizen
a reply to: research100

I'm not so sure I would sign up to get blood from a survivor. Here's a little tidbit from the WHO website:

who.int

People remain infectious as long as their blood and body fluids, including semen and breast milk, contain the virus. Men who have recovered from the disease can still transmit the virus through their semen for up to 7 weeks after recovery from illness.

Right, thanks! I was looking for that link. One of the videos in my OP link says that there's no evidence of the Ebola virus in him after three week's quarantine and approximately four weeks in all of disease/recovery.

This isn't adding up whatsoever.

In other news, I've been watching the network news coverage of the sheriff that was in Duncan's relative's apartment for thirty minutes or so; he appears to be having symptoms of stomach pain and aches, but not fever as reported by his son.

Lots and LOTS of news reporting mixed with religious commentary; apparently prayer works great in Atlanta (recovered guy), not so much in Dallas (one dead guy, possibly a new infection), and worst of all in Africa (over 1000 deaths and counting, all of whom probably prayed a whole bunch), but we're being encouraged to keep praying in any event by our intrepid daytime tv talking heads /s/ who are starting to look worried, if I do say so myself.

a reply to: kevinp2300

There was a fight between the CDC, WHO and other NGOs over who was going to be in charge of the Ebola outbreak. The leaders and/or people who call the shots were all pissed off about not getting enough control, so while they attended their parties eating and drinking the best foods/wines that he world can produce, they argued over the riff raft of Africa, uninterested in getting involved unless they were given the amount of control they wanted.

Much of it can be found here.

It's really bad how inept certain agencies are when they were made for the very purpose of controlling these kinds of public threats. Simply because of bureaucracy.

The WHO, an arm of the United Nations, is responsible for coordinating international action in a crisis like this, but it has suffered budget cuts, has lost many of its brightest minds and was slow to sound a global alarm on Ebola. Not until Aug. 8, 4 1 ⁄ 2 months into the epidemic, did the organization declare a global emergency. Its Africa office, which oversees the region, initially did not welcome a robust role by the CDC in the response to the outbreak.

Previous Ebola outbreaks had been quickly throttled, but that experience proved misleading and officials did not grasp the potential scale of the disaster. Their imaginations were unequal to the virulence of the pathogen.

"In retrospect, we could have responded faster. Some of the criticism is appropriate," acknowledged Richard Brennan, director of the WHO's Department of Emergency Risk Management and Humanitarian Response. But he added, "While some of the criticism we accept, I think we also have to get things in perspective that this outbreak has a dynamic that's unlike everything we've ever seen before and, I think, has caught everyone unawares."

Good questions, signalfire. I have many as well.

Brantly flew to Nebraska to give blood to the second doc there too. Flew. He was in DC. Met the president.

Check this: www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: boncho

Yes, I knew that (as stated in the OP).

He was not considered well enough to travel until after the transfusion was given when he 'miraculously' felt much better.

Judge Jenkins now on the defensive about his grandstanding exposure to the Duncan family:

Judge Jenkins Not Ebola Risk

originally posted by: signalfire
a reply to: boncho

Yes, I knew that (as stated in the OP).

He was not considered well enough to travel until after the transfusion was given when he 'miraculously' felt much better.

Im not sure what the problem is though. He didn't receive a transfusion either. He received the experimental drug ZMAPP by intravenous.

He was going to offer up the dose to the older woman who was also infected, but as his breathing became more laboured he told doctors he felt like he was going to die that night. So by the time it thawed he changed his mind and was administered the dose.

The viral infection is over by the time it is beat. While some survivors reach the point of really bad symptoms, they have found that most have an ability within their red blood cells to rebuild and fix damage done by the virus. Along with Brantly and his colleague there are also a number of African doctors and nurses, not to mention regular people, who have beat the Ebola infection.

Besides not looking into the subject enough, Im not sure the purpose of the thread or the problem you people have around the circumstances surrounding. Not to say there isn't problems with the information available, or whats being released, only that the questions you are posing are easily answered, and judging by some of them, it doesn't seem you've made any effort at all to look into the subject.

a reply to: boncho

Sorry, you're right; in his case it was Zmapp and not a transfusion of a recovered patient. I've been watching so many of these videos it gets confusing.

The 'purpose' of the OP was to point out that Brantly never looked sick, and seems to have recovered quickly and completely from what was described as a 'grave' condition. He didn't get any treatment at all for the first week, which seems to be the killing zone for most of the people in Africa.

If this bug dissolves organs, causes bruising so severe that bullous blisters form on the skin and infarcts in the brain cause the 'zombie' look we've seen in videos of people in Africa, how come Brantly looks so well now? Is it two different diseases, was his diagnosis faulty or otherwise in error, or has this been weaponized or otherwise tampered with to change its symptoms?

originally posted by: AnonymousCitizen
a reply to: research100

I'm not so sure I would sign up to get blood from a survivor. Here's a little tidbit from the WHO website:

who.int

People remain infectious as long as their blood and body fluids, including semen and breast milk, contain the virus. Men who have recovered from the disease can still transmit the virus through their semen for up to 7 weeks after recovery from illness.

So come home from the hospital and rest up a few days and have a little nooky and give your honey Ebola!?! I hadn't heard that until now but it's shocking.

a reply to: boncho

There was a fight between the CDC, WHO and other NGOs over who was going to be in charge of the Ebola outbreak. The leaders and/or people who call the shots were all pissed off about not getting enough control, so while they attended their parties eating and drinking the best foods/wines that he world can produce, they argued over the riff raft of Africa, uninterested in getting involved unless they were given the amount of control they wanted.

Typical of them. Fighting over who can make the most $ selling vaccines and getting more $ for "humanitarian aid". Cost thousands of lives and counting. Who knows, the conspiracy theorist in me wonders if this wasn't all planned under the guise of an eventual "terrorist attack". Maybe the ISIS media hyper coverage was to distract us from the "incompetence" of our world's health crisis organizations.

Previous Ebola outbreaks had been quickly throttled, but that experience proved misleading and officials did not grasp the potential scale of the disaster. Their imaginations were unequal to the virulence of the pathogen.

"In retrospect, we could have responded faster. Some of the criticism is appropriate," acknowledged Richard Brennan, director of the WHO's Department of Emergency Risk Management and Humanitarian Response. But he added, "While some of the criticism we accept, I think we also have to get things in perspective that this outbreak has a dynamic that's unlike everything we've ever seen before and, I think, has caught everyone unawares."

Whoa...scary words to read there. Lets hope that isn't a lab mutated virus. I remember learning how viruses work and it is pretty crazy. They cut into your plasma membrane of your cell and send a strand of their RNA into our nucleus and reprograms it to create more viruses instead of cell components. When the cell is full of viruses it bursts and they infect other cells. Cool stuff lol...Also, what about the big pharm companies that sell ebola vaccines. Is corporate terrorism possible?