3 ms·

@solipsism If you think the site is your best source rather than taking people's word for it, take it and don't discuss with other people in the forums. I'm rea

• solipsism 10y ago
  It's not the site. It's the CDC. I can guarantee Brazil considers the CDC an excellent source as well. I'm reaffirming that the statement is incorrect and they should travel down to Brazil to understand this matter If you think the CDC and the WHO are not in Brazil, you're mistaken. But let's pretend you're right that CDC doesn't know what they're talking about. How about the Ministério da Saúde? http://portalsaude.saude.gov.br/index.php/descricao-da-doenca-zika http://portalsaude.saude.gov.br/index.php/descricao-da-doenc... A febre por vírus Zika é descrita como uma doença febril aguda, autolimitada, com duração de 3-7 dias, geralmente sem complicações graves e não há registro de mortes Translation: Fever by Zika virus is described as an acute febrile illness, self-limited, lasting 3-7 days, usually without serious complications and there is no record of deaths. The hospitalization rate is potentially low. Segundo a literatura, mais de 80% das pessoas infectadas não desenvolvem manifestações clínicas Translation: According to the literature, over 80% of infected people do not develop clinical manifestations This seems to back up very well ceejayoz's original comment, which you disagreed with: pointed out these diseases can often present as a mild cold, for which you'd never go to the hospital. You may well have gotten them without really noticing So, presumably you don't think the Ministério da Saúde also have to travel to Brazil to know what they're talking about? There's also all kinds of information on portalsaude.saude.gov.br referencing the CDC, the WHO, and describing the fact that the CDC has been in Brazil for months conducting research and field investigations.
  • ramon 10y ago
    "Fever by Zika virus is described as an acute febrile illness." There you go! See that there's a difference from the other statement? "Segundo a literatura, mais de 80% das pessoas infectadas não desenvolvem manifestações clínicas, porém quando presentes a doença se caracteriza pelo surgimento do exantema maculopapular pruriginoso, febre intermitente, hiperemia conjuntival não purulenta e sem prurido, artralgia, mialgia e dor de cabeça e menos frequentemente, edema, dor de garganta, tosse, vômitos e haematospermia.. No entanto, a artralgia pode persistir por aproximadamente um mês." This statement is contradictory, this is were the confusion resides. I have never seen a case till today regarding this, neither has the society here a person that had Zika but very little symptoms, it's always hard and pushes the people to bed, what has happened a lot here is since "Zika" is on evidence people push "Dengue" symptoms as "Zika" just because it's on the "Vibe", so the numbers of Zika are huge but in reality it's a mix of Dengue (types 1,2 and 3), Zika and Chikungunha.
    • dragonwriter 10y ago
      > "Fever by Zika virus is described as an acute febrile illness." > There you go! See that there's a difference from the other statement? I think you are confused about medical terminology, particularly, I think you are confusing acute fever (which is a fever with sudden onset) with severe fever. > I have never seen a case till today regarding this, neither has the society here a person that had Zika but very little symptoms, it's always hard and pushes the people to bed I'm pretty sure that the reason these sources have stated this is that people with Zika but very few symptoms have been identified by medical authorities. OTOH, many people with Zika but without severe symptoms won't ever know they had Zika, since they may not seek medical attention.