7 ms·
Congo gov. says it's 'on alert' over mystery flu-like disease that killed dozens
- lawls 2y agoJust in time for the holidays.
- shadowbanned-00 2y ago[dead]
- jimbob45 2y agoEpidemiological experts are in the region to take samples and investigate the disease, the minister said... “At the current stage, we cannot speak of a large-scale epidemic, we must wait for the results of the samples taken,” health minister Kamba said regarding the mystery flu-like disease. Not really "on alert" then, just waiting to see if what we're seeing is novel or what.
- uoaei 2y agoThat's exactly what "on alert" means.
- more_corn 2y ago[flagged]
- phtrivier 2y agoWith a twist : this time is only affects kids, only cheap repurposed medecines work, we have too much information about where it comes from, and none pays any attention.
- aaron695 2y ago[dead]
- gorgoiler 2y agoHmmm. What is “ctvnews.ca”? I do not have any prior reason to trust this news source but would welcome some kind of hints. Edit: I show my ignorance of north of the border! It is a major Canadian news station. Thanks for the replies.
- ceejayoz 2y agoMajor news org in Canada. If you prefer: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y83ejz7eeo.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y83ejz7eeo.amp https://apnews.com/article/congo-mystery-disease-0df7a70c8830783bb15e66d47ad48de4 https://apnews.com/article/congo-mystery-disease-0df7a70c883... https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna182804 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna182804
- taysix 2y agoOne of the largest Canadian news broadcasters https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CTV_News https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CTV_News
- eddsolves 2y agoIt’s fine to not know, but why not google and check? It’s surely quicker than asking
- Kye 2y agoI see people here in the US take The Beaverton seriously. I see people in Canada take The Onion seriously. It's hard to evaluate things like this from the outside.
- coolspot 2y ago[flagged]
- griomnib 2y agobrb, getting 50,000 rolls of toilet paper.
- silisili 2y agoCan't wait. The toilet paper thing was a big part in changing my thoughts and outlook on people and society at large.
- Tarsul 2y agothe crazy part was that this was a phenomen in many countries. What does this say? That it's human nature? Or that our culture is just too damn similar? I don't know but worth some studies for sure ;)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- vundercind 2y agoIf you see shortages elsewhere, it’s not crazy to prepare by stocking up in case it spreads. I mean, you’re gonna use it eventually either way. The remains true even if the entire and only cause of the shortage is people stocking up for fear of a shortage, and even if you know that.
- input_sh 2y agoA couple of viral posts of empty shelves easily crossed langugage barriers? It's not like every country lives in complete isolation, we all share the same internet.
- hiccuphippo 2y agoSo what's the conclusion on a society that buys toilet paper on a pandemic?
- whalesalad 2y agoI've seen this movie before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outbreak_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outbreak_(film)
- autoexec 2y agoWe watched it live in 2020 and we failed so hard that this is probably the worst time for any new pandemic, especially one that can be described as being in any way "flu like". We've learned from experience that no matter how many people start dying, huge parts of the population will not take it seriously and that governments will only care about keeping the workers busy making money for their employers even while those employers refuse to provide them with PPE or sick time. Nobody trusts the CDC as it is, and that will only get worse with the coming administration. I'm just hoping that this isn't anything new, and that it doesn't spread very far.
- 123yawaworht456 2y ago[flagged]
- cthalupa 2y ago> it is safe to say now that the events of 2020-2021 were a mass hysteria. Were they? > There have been reported 7,076,316[4] (updated 3 December 2024) confirmed COVID-induced deaths worldwide. As of January 2023, taking into account likely COVID induced deaths via excess deaths, the 95% confidence interval suggests the pandemic to have caused between 19.1 and 36 million deaths Hmm. I see. Definitely mass hysteria.
- 123yawaworht456 2y ago1. how many of those deaths were among healthy people below the age of 50, who constitute 90% or whatever of the workforce? was there any point forcing children and teenagers into confinement for months? 2. did COVID get eradicated in mid-2022, when virtually all supposed countermeasures were abandoned?
- indulona 2y ago[flagged]
- lenerdenator 2y ago[flagged]
- aatd86 2y ago[flagged]
- bee_rider 2y agoRegions with higher population growth are probably better suited to dealing with pandemics, in the sense that they have larger young healthy populations, so they should suffer less and bounce back more quickly.
- foobarian 2y ago[flagged]
- VeejayRampay 2y agowhere did you get that information?
- mort96 2y agoI think it's a joke? Probably referencing how everyone said that COVID-19 wasn't airborne and we were hyper focused on surface transmission when it is, in fact, airborne
- XorNot 2y agoI love how everyone is a retrospective expert on COVID-19, claiming things were "obvious" about it when it was in fact, a brand new disease - characterized by in fact, never having been seen before and as a result was completely unknown. "It was airborne! They should've known that!" - like, how? You can't exactly grab a few hundred people, and run an experiment where you deliberately infect a bunch of them with a brand new, deadly disease to really pin down the transmission mechanism. And given that everyone lost their minds over face masks, "wash hands" was some pretty mild initial advice while so much wasn't certain.
- dboreham 2y agoSee above. I could tell it spread airborne and said so here at the time.
- _yb2s 2y agoIt was obvious to lay people observing the situation that it was airborne- with things like the choir singing superspreader event in March 2020. This was so unlike past airborne diseases, that this was a rare case where being formally educated in virology seemed to make it harder observe the obvious.
- 2y ago
- losteric 2y agoSo as I understand it: - Panzi is an isolated, hard-to-access area where malnutrition, prior epidemics, and seasonal flu have already weakened the population. - Poor healthcare infrastructure and delayed medical intervention have amplified deaths. - There is no evidence of rapid or widespread transmission. (see first point). - Samples have been retrieved for testing. At this point, there is no information on transmission vector (assuming it’s even a disease)
- giarc 2y ago300+ cases is quite a few when you consider that many will not be reported.
- hvenev 2y agoDespite the sad context, this seems refreshing -- an alert is raised due to a real and serious concern.
- autoexec 2y agoIt is nice that things aren't so bad that nobody is even keeping an eye out for things like this. There's some comfort in knowing that somewhere smart people are looking into it.
- cmriversepi 2y agoI’m an epi professor and longtime HN lurker. I wrote a short essay yesterday about how to think about these mysterious outbreaks [1]. Briefly, the most common outcome is they are determined to be an endemic disease. Less likely is an emerging infectious disease. The most concerning possibility is something novel or highly unexpected. [1] https://caitlinrivers.substack.com/p/understanding-mysterious-outbreaks https://caitlinrivers.substack.com/p/understanding-mysteriou...
- etiam 2y agoAre you willing to hazard a guess how long it will take to get material analyzed to determine which of your categories this is in?
- cmriversepi 2y agoThe first round of test results should come in Friday or this weekend. The longer it goes undiagnosed, the more we tip into categories 2 and 3.
- etiam 2y agoThanks. So basically, if it's any of numerous reasonably well-known but very local diseases a fluid's probably going to go colored in some field test kit and say which one, else it could be something known (and often of known substantial concern for large-scale contagion) but too rare or understudied to have cheap robust quick tests yet so that has to be shipped to a real lab (probably with very high biosecurity rating), and if the lab doesn't recognize what they're seeing in their electron microscope and has to do fundamental research first to get a good biochemical profiling it's something truly expanding the boundaries of known infectious pathology? Something like that?
- jonny_eh 2y ago> Less likely is an emerging infectious disease. The most concerning possibility is something novel or highly unexpected. What's the difference between an emerging and novel disease?
- tonetheman 2y ago[dead]