5 ms·

Two aid workers infected with the Ebola virus have been discharged from hospital

66 points by jdmitch 12y ago

bellerocky 12y ago
I wonder if Brantly has now immunity or resistance and can help fight the disease without worry of reinfection. How does that work? Can you be reinfected with ebola if you survive?
- codezero 12y ago
  Survivors are believed to be more resistant but I think immunity is unlikely. Surely if he returns to risky areas he'll take the same precautions that anyone else would, it's not worth the risk and I'm sure those precautions are meant to protect from a number of tropical illnesses that are a risk in addition to Ebola.
- azernik 12y ago
  I don't remember which newspaper I read this in (I believe New York Times?) but apparently there are ~5 known varieties of Ebola, and recovering from an infection only grants immunity to that one variety. So, in general, no, but if this outbreak involves only one strain they might be immune to that particular one.
  - s_q_b 12y ago
    According to the blood samples on 20 patients throughout West Africa, the current outbreak is a new strain. It is closely related to Ebola Zaire, but appears to have involved a different trans-species transmission event than the Zaire strain.
- epaladin 12y ago
  That's actually an interesting question- were you to theoretically be able to initial effect of Ebola infection, would the immune system eventually be able to create effective antibodies for it? I don't know if it would work the same way if you're introducing antibodies for treatment.
- jwcooper 12y ago
  According to the mashable article [1] linked in the comments one component of the serum had some extended protection in a series of tests: "A November 2013 Defyrus study showed that ZMAb offered extended protection against the virus. Scientists reinfected surviving monkeys 10 weeks after their first infection, and 100% survived. What's more, four out of the six monkeys reinfected 13 weeks after initial exposure survived." [1] http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/ http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/
- goodcanadian 12y ago
  Ebola is a viral infection, so in theory, he should be immune or at least, strongly resistant to reinfection. According to wikipedia, there are four variant viruses that are thought to be disease causing in humans. I suspect that he would be much less resistant to the other three.
  - s_q_b 12y ago
    Right. But since the current outbreak is limited to a single strain, he should have an acquired immunity. However, he's probably more useful contributing as a research subject state-side, than a treatment specialist in West Africa, to say nothing of the physical and psychological health issues he's most likely still facing.
leishulang 12y ago
Heroes.
- NathanCH 12y ago
  I'm curious why you think that. Or did you mean the doctors that helped save them?
  - donsupreme 12y ago
    If he was a doctor in AIDS ward, and got infected with HIV while caring for other sick patients, wouldn't he be considered a hero? He is a missionary doctor oversea, working in some of the poorest countries in the world, clearly not doing for the money. Believe it or not, people have been called heroes for doing a lot less than that.
    - privong 12y ago
      > If he was a doctor in AIDS ward, and got infected with HIV while caring for other sick patients, wouldn't he be considered a hero? Why is contraction of the virus implied as a necessary condition for being a hero? Clearly the heroic act is the treatement of others; that the hypothetical AIDS doctor or these ebola doctors contracted the disease they were treating in others should not be a necessary condition for considering them heroes.
      - mnarayan01 12y ago
        Nothing the GP said implied it was necessary, merely sufficient.
      - anigbrowl 12y ago
        It isn't; it's the risk of doing so that one willingly runs which makes one a hero. Since we don't see these peole at work the fact of contracting it is an indirect proof of hands-on activity.
    - damon_c 12y ago
rayiner 12y ago
More info on ZMapp, the experimental serum both patients were given: http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/ http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/ Also, this would make a great movie.
clebio 12y ago
Is this just poor writing, or poor representation of the science? This article contradicts itself. > said in a statement that she was free of the virus but was significantly weakened. > There is no cure for Ebola, ... > But both Dr Brantly and Mrs Writebol received an experimental treatment known as ZMapp. > ...it remains unclear if [ZMapp] is responsible for their recovery. Is the virus in remission, or has it been eradicated from Writebol? If there is no cure, then it cannot have been eradicated. Maybe there's no _proven_ cure, in the sense of full medical trials? In the 'poor writing' department (but unrelated to the above), the article also doesn't tell us who Franklin Graham is. This appears to be the only reference to the name: > ...Franklin Graham said in a statement.
- giarc 12y ago
  There is not cure for Ebola like there is for other diseases. Ebola is a acute infection, meaning that if the body can fight it off, it leaves the body. Think of it like influenza. There is no cure, but once you get over it, there is no more influenza virus in your system. They were given ZMapp, but they can't tell if that worked or not. Perhaps they would have overcome their illness without it. They likely didn't say that the male was free of the virus because it has been shown that Ebola can be transmitted through semen of men for up to 7 weeks.
- clebio 12y ago
  And, lest you think I'm daft, my _guess_ is that they mean the son of Billy Graham, but then perhaps the author should mention his tie to Samaritan's Purse.
- 001sky 12y ago
  “Nancy is free of the virus, but the lingering effects of the battle have left her in a significantly weakened condition,” her husband, David Writebol, said in a written statement. “Thus, we decided it would be best to leave the hospital privately to be able to give her the rest and recuperation she needs at this time.” It sounds like she's weakened from not only fighting off the illness, but being bedridded etc for several weeks. The drugs may have also had side effects (that they don't want to publicise for PR purposes).
- 12y ago
phkahler 12y ago
I've been wondering about treating ebola with iodine. It's antimicrobial and antiviral. The Red Cross uses it to clean the skin before taking blood donations because it is superior to alcohol for cleaning. It is also useful to promote healing, among many other things (It seem to be helpful to the mitochondria which means wide-ranging benefit). But just due to the use for cleaning, and the aid in healing, I wonder if a few drops of Lugol's solution in a glass of water several times a day would help an ebola patient. That would hit right in the gut where the infection goes wild and does the most damage.
- epochwolf 12y ago
  The iodine used in cleaning skin causes all kinds of internal damage if ingested. See http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/symptoms-of-iodine-overdose/ http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/symptoms-o...
  - phkahler 12y ago
    I'm not advocating concentrated iodine. A few drops of Lugol's mixed in a glass of water isn't going to damage anything - lots of people take that exact amount on a regular basis. We could argue about long term effects of that, but I'm talking about doing it for a week or two to help with something that is killing half the people it infects. Where is the guy with iodine user id when you need them?
- owenmarshall 12y ago
  >That would hit right in the gut where the infection goes wild and does the most damage. Ebola virus disease is not like c. difficile. It attacks endothelial cells, liver cells, phagocytes... it's as systemic as they come.
  - phkahler 12y ago
    >> Ebola virus disease is not like c. difficile. It attacks endothelial cells, liver cells, phagocytes... it's as systemic as they come. As are the benefits of iodine. But to be clear, you don't think it's worth even trying right?
lazylester 12y ago
I just can't reconcile that a man of science (Brantly) credits magic ("God") for his recovery! Don't you get cognitive dissonance dude?
- 001sky 12y ago
  No offense but this is pretty common. Also, "in the field" you'd have a hard time differentiating a fairly-stochastic chance outcome (or 'luck') from a loaded die without a bit of infrastructure in place for your benefit. The two are probably related and nothing to get worked up about, IMHO.
- mendort 12y ago
  He probably also credits his doctors with enabling his recovery. And the drugs he took. And his own decision not to just give up and die. How can he possibly handle all these crazy contradictions?
- Shivetya 12y ago
  please note that when many people credit God they do not necessarily do for the act of curing them but for allowing them to be cured.
  - wehadfun 12y ago
    There are a million things that had to go right for him to take the drug (no transportation problems, no attack, hospital didn't catch on fire, medicine didn't get compromised) science and Man control none of them. So it makes since that he thanked God.
    - jmgao 12y ago
      Don't forget getting ebola in the first place!
- Apocryphon 12y ago
  I can't reconcile that men of science (internet atheists) can't comprehend other people (non-atheists) for being able to have seemingly contradictory beliefs. Do you think you're above cognitive dissonance yourself, dude?

66 points by jdmitch 12y ago

I wonder if Brantly has now immunity or resistance and can help fight the disease without worry of reinfection. How does that work? Can you be reinfected with ebola if you survive?

codezero 12y ago
Survivors are believed to be more resistant but I think immunity is unlikely. Surely if he returns to risky areas he'll take the same precautions that anyone else would, it's not worth the risk and I'm sure those precautions are meant to protect from a number of tropical illnesses that are a risk in addition to Ebola.
azernik 12y ago
I don't remember which newspaper I read this in (I believe New York Times?) but apparently there are ~5 known varieties of Ebola, and recovering from an infection only grants immunity to that one variety. So, in general, no, but if this outbreak involves only one strain they might be immune to that particular one.
- s_q_b 12y ago
  According to the blood samples on 20 patients throughout West Africa, the current outbreak is a new strain. It is closely related to Ebola Zaire, but appears to have involved a different trans-species transmission event than the Zaire strain.
epaladin 12y ago
That's actually an interesting question- were you to theoretically be able to initial effect of Ebola infection, would the immune system eventually be able to create effective antibodies for it? I don't know if it would work the same way if you're introducing antibodies for treatment.
jwcooper 12y ago
According to the mashable article [1] linked in the comments one component of the serum had some extended protection in a series of tests: "A November 2013 Defyrus study showed that ZMAb offered extended protection against the virus. Scientists reinfected surviving monkeys 10 weeks after their first infection, and 100% survived. What's more, four out of the six monkeys reinfected 13 weeks after initial exposure survived." [1] http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/ http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/
goodcanadian 12y ago
Ebola is a viral infection, so in theory, he should be immune or at least, strongly resistant to reinfection. According to wikipedia, there are four variant viruses that are thought to be disease causing in humans. I suspect that he would be much less resistant to the other three.
- s_q_b 12y ago
  Right. But since the current outbreak is limited to a single strain, he should have an acquired immunity. However, he's probably more useful contributing as a research subject state-side, than a treatment specialist in West Africa, to say nothing of the physical and psychological health issues he's most likely still facing.

leishulang 12y ago

Heroes.

NathanCH 12y ago
I'm curious why you think that. Or did you mean the doctors that helped save them?
- donsupreme 12y ago
  If he was a doctor in AIDS ward, and got infected with HIV while caring for other sick patients, wouldn't he be considered a hero? He is a missionary doctor oversea, working in some of the poorest countries in the world, clearly not doing for the money. Believe it or not, people have been called heroes for doing a lot less than that.
  - privong 12y ago
    > If he was a doctor in AIDS ward, and got infected with HIV while caring for other sick patients, wouldn't he be considered a hero? Why is contraction of the virus implied as a necessary condition for being a hero? Clearly the heroic act is the treatement of others; that the hypothetical AIDS doctor or these ebola doctors contracted the disease they were treating in others should not be a necessary condition for considering them heroes.
    - mnarayan01 12y ago
      Nothing the GP said implied it was necessary, merely sufficient.
    - anigbrowl 12y ago
      It isn't; it's the risk of doing so that one willingly runs which makes one a hero. Since we don't see these peole at work the fact of contracting it is an indirect proof of hands-on activity.
  - damon_c 12y ago

rayiner 12y ago

More info on ZMapp, the experimental serum both patients were given: http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/ http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/ Also, this would make a great movie.

clebio 12y ago

Is this just poor writing, or poor representation of the science? This article contradicts itself. > said in a statement that she was free of the virus but was significantly weakened. > There is no cure for Ebola, ... > But both Dr Brantly and Mrs Writebol received an experimental treatment known as ZMapp. > ...it remains unclear if [ZMapp] is responsible for their recovery. Is the virus in remission, or has it been eradicated from Writebol? If there is no cure, then it cannot have been eradicated. Maybe there's no _proven_ cure, in the sense of full medical trials? In the 'poor writing' department (but unrelated to the above), the article also doesn't tell us who Franklin Graham is. This appears to be the only reference to the name: > ...Franklin Graham said in a statement.

giarc 12y ago
There is not cure for Ebola like there is for other diseases. Ebola is a acute infection, meaning that if the body can fight it off, it leaves the body. Think of it like influenza. There is no cure, but once you get over it, there is no more influenza virus in your system. They were given ZMapp, but they can't tell if that worked or not. Perhaps they would have overcome their illness without it. They likely didn't say that the male was free of the virus because it has been shown that Ebola can be transmitted through semen of men for up to 7 weeks.
clebio 12y ago
And, lest you think I'm daft, my _guess_ is that they mean the son of Billy Graham, but then perhaps the author should mention his tie to Samaritan's Purse.
001sky 12y ago
“Nancy is free of the virus, but the lingering effects of the battle have left her in a significantly weakened condition,” her husband, David Writebol, said in a written statement. “Thus, we decided it would be best to leave the hospital privately to be able to give her the rest and recuperation she needs at this time.” It sounds like she's weakened from not only fighting off the illness, but being bedridded etc for several weeks. The drugs may have also had side effects (that they don't want to publicise for PR purposes).
12y ago

phkahler 12y ago

I've been wondering about treating ebola with iodine. It's antimicrobial and antiviral. The Red Cross uses it to clean the skin before taking blood donations because it is superior to alcohol for cleaning. It is also useful to promote healing, among many other things (It seem to be helpful to the mitochondria which means wide-ranging benefit). But just due to the use for cleaning, and the aid in healing, I wonder if a few drops of Lugol's solution in a glass of water several times a day would help an ebola patient. That would hit right in the gut where the infection goes wild and does the most damage.

epochwolf 12y ago
The iodine used in cleaning skin causes all kinds of internal damage if ingested. See http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/symptoms-of-iodine-overdose/ http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/symptoms-o...
- phkahler 12y ago
  I'm not advocating concentrated iodine. A few drops of Lugol's mixed in a glass of water isn't going to damage anything - lots of people take that exact amount on a regular basis. We could argue about long term effects of that, but I'm talking about doing it for a week or two to help with something that is killing half the people it infects. Where is the guy with iodine user id when you need them?
owenmarshall 12y ago
>That would hit right in the gut where the infection goes wild and does the most damage. Ebola virus disease is not like c. difficile. It attacks endothelial cells, liver cells, phagocytes... it's as systemic as they come.
- phkahler 12y ago
  >> Ebola virus disease is not like c. difficile. It attacks endothelial cells, liver cells, phagocytes... it's as systemic as they come. As are the benefits of iodine. But to be clear, you don't think it's worth even trying right?

lazylester 12y ago

I just can't reconcile that a man of science (Brantly) credits magic ("God") for his recovery! Don't you get cognitive dissonance dude?

001sky 12y ago
No offense but this is pretty common. Also, "in the field" you'd have a hard time differentiating a fairly-stochastic chance outcome (or 'luck') from a loaded die without a bit of infrastructure in place for your benefit. The two are probably related and nothing to get worked up about, IMHO.
mendort 12y ago
He probably also credits his doctors with enabling his recovery. And the drugs he took. And his own decision not to just give up and die. How can he possibly handle all these crazy contradictions?
Shivetya 12y ago
please note that when many people credit God they do not necessarily do for the act of curing them but for allowing them to be cured.
- wehadfun 12y ago
  There are a million things that had to go right for him to take the drug (no transportation problems, no attack, hospital didn't catch on fire, medicine didn't get compromised) science and Man control none of them. So it makes since that he thanked God.
  - jmgao 12y ago
    Don't forget getting ebola in the first place!
Apocryphon 12y ago
I can't reconcile that men of science (internet atheists) can't comprehend other people (non-atheists) for being able to have seemingly contradictory beliefs. Do you think you're above cognitive dissonance yourself, dude?