3 ms·

People keep repeating this as if it were a definitive rebuttal of all fears, but this story gives a few great examples of why the confidence might be misplaced:

by timr 12y ago

People keep repeating this as if it were a definitive rebuttal of all fears, but this story gives a few great examples of why the confidence might be misplaced: when your primary diagnostic criterion is a fever (common; easily suppressed with OTC medication) and affirmative answer to the question "have you been to West Africa?", it doesn't really matter how good your public health system is -- it's a going to be a leaky early warning system. If someone makes it through the airport screens and carries the virus into a city, the epidemiology could become overwhelming before we know an outbreak has begun. So yes, we have the advantage that we have real hospitals and good infection control, but we have the disadvantage that we have huge cities, high population density and lots of personal mobility.

maxerickson 12y ago
I dislike that you have characterized "It's likely easier" as "a definitive rebuttal of all fears".
- timr 12y ago
  I wasn't referring just to your comment; I've been hearing this as the default response to just about every rational concern since Trump started tweeting and it became a de facto left/right issue. Obviously he's a moron, but the response from the other side of the debate has been almost as one-dimensional.
knodi123 12y ago
Not to mention the terrorism angle. How hard do you think it would be for al queda to get their hands on an ebola victim, harvest a gallon of body fluids, and smuggle it into the US? Because distribution wouldn't be hard at all; down here in texas, there are any number of outdoor misting systems that are aimed at busy streets full of sweltering tourists. Bio-terrorism looks so easy.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- aaron987 12y ago
  Ebola is nothing new. If terrorists wanted to use it as a weapon, they could have done it a long time ago. Now would actually be a bad time for a bioterror attack, because people are on high alert for anything that could be ebola. It would be a lot more effective if it came out of the blue, giving it time to spread before anyone realized their fever was actually ebola.
Perdition 12y ago
>If someone makes it through the airport screens and carries the virus into a city, the epidemiology could become overwhelming before we know an outbreak has begun. Could, but very unlikely to, as Ebola doesn't spread as easily as cold or flu viruses. Most of the outbreaks in Africa, where numerous dangerous practices such as hospitals reusing needles helped spread the virus, have had only a few hundred cases. The latest outbreak is pushing towards 2000 cases but local practices that don't exist in the West are contributing significantly.
snowwrestler 12y ago
The point of comfort for the U.S. is that ebola transmission currently requires direct contact with bodily fluids--not that it's easy to diagnose. If you had a fever and went to work, and it turned out you had ebola, it's still unlikely you would infect your coworkers, because it is rare for American workers to directly contact each others' bodily fluids. Think of ebola like AIDS that kills faster. That's the right mental model for how it is transmitted. And, it's a good reminder that we have decades of practice managing diseases transmitted that way.
- jeffdavis 12y ago
  "The point of comfort for the U.S. is that ebola transmission currently requires direct contact with bodily fluids" Doctors who knew they were working with Ebola still managed to get infected. So it can't be that hard to get it. We don't need to panic, but it would be unwise to be too complacent.
  - HenryMc 12y ago
    They may have known they were dealing with Ebola, but they didn't have the equipment or facilities to take all the steps necessary to prevent transmission.
  - bodyfour 12y ago
    Keep in mind these doctors were surrounded by hundreds of cases and potential cases, in field hospitals without even running water. It's quite understandable that they would be at risk even while taking what precautions they could.
  - bsder 12y ago
    > Doctors who knew they were working with Ebola still managed to get infected. Yes, but these doctors often don't even have the equipment to provide proper antiseptic medical care let alone containment-type biosuits. In addition, quarantines can be rolled out quickly and effectively in modern countries with well-developed communication infrastructure. This is not to say that we should be complacent. However, a bad flu epidemic poses more direct hazard to the modern world.

by timr 12y ago

maxerickson 12y ago

I dislike that you have characterized "It's likely easier" as "a definitive rebuttal of all fears".

timr 12y ago
I wasn't referring just to your comment; I've been hearing this as the default response to just about every rational concern since Trump started tweeting and it became a de facto left/right issue. Obviously he's a moron, but the response from the other side of the debate has been almost as one-dimensional.

knodi123 12y ago

Not to mention the terrorism angle. How hard do you think it would be for al queda to get their hands on an ebola victim, harvest a gallon of body fluids, and smuggle it into the US? Because distribution wouldn't be hard at all; down here in texas, there are any number of outdoor misting systems that are aimed at busy streets full of sweltering tourists. Bio-terrorism looks so easy.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
aaron987 12y ago
Ebola is nothing new. If terrorists wanted to use it as a weapon, they could have done it a long time ago. Now would actually be a bad time for a bioterror attack, because people are on high alert for anything that could be ebola. It would be a lot more effective if it came out of the blue, giving it time to spread before anyone realized their fever was actually ebola.

Perdition 12y ago

>If someone makes it through the airport screens and carries the virus into a city, the epidemiology could become overwhelming before we know an outbreak has begun. Could, but very unlikely to, as Ebola doesn't spread as easily as cold or flu viruses. Most of the outbreaks in Africa, where numerous dangerous practices such as hospitals reusing needles helped spread the virus, have had only a few hundred cases. The latest outbreak is pushing towards 2000 cases but local practices that don't exist in the West are contributing significantly.

snowwrestler 12y ago

The point of comfort for the U.S. is that ebola transmission currently requires direct contact with bodily fluids--not that it's easy to diagnose. If you had a fever and went to work, and it turned out you had ebola, it's still unlikely you would infect your coworkers, because it is rare for American workers to directly contact each others' bodily fluids. Think of ebola like AIDS that kills faster. That's the right mental model for how it is transmitted. And, it's a good reminder that we have decades of practice managing diseases transmitted that way.

jeffdavis 12y ago
"The point of comfort for the U.S. is that ebola transmission currently requires direct contact with bodily fluids" Doctors who knew they were working with Ebola still managed to get infected. So it can't be that hard to get it. We don't need to panic, but it would be unwise to be too complacent.
- HenryMc 12y ago
  They may have known they were dealing with Ebola, but they didn't have the equipment or facilities to take all the steps necessary to prevent transmission.
- bodyfour 12y ago
  Keep in mind these doctors were surrounded by hundreds of cases and potential cases, in field hospitals without even running water. It's quite understandable that they would be at risk even while taking what precautions they could.
- bsder 12y ago
  > Doctors who knew they were working with Ebola still managed to get infected. Yes, but these doctors often don't even have the equipment to provide proper antiseptic medical care let alone containment-type biosuits. In addition, quarantines can be rolled out quickly and effectively in modern countries with well-developed communication infrastructure. This is not to say that we should be complacent. However, a bad flu epidemic poses more direct hazard to the modern world.