3 ms·

The critical distinction here is that Ebola doesn't seem to infect the outer part of the respiratory system like colds or influenza. There's not a huge mass o

by hga 12y ago

The critical distinction here is that Ebola doesn't seem to infect the outer part of the respiratory system like colds or influenza. There's not a huge mass of cells there to be shedding viri and getting into the air, and it would take more than a few mutations for that to change. Ebola viri have been found in saliva, tears, can come from bleeding in the respiratory system, so it obviously can get airborne that way. Exactly what that means (how big are the droplets, how long do they stay in the air etc.), how significant that is as a mode of transmission (which includes iffy estimates of how many viri (virus particles) are required to make an infective dose) ... we just don't know. But with our current Ebola importation policy, it's very likely we will start to get answers to these questions....

001sky 12y ago
Ebola is in the various fluids discharged by coughing and sneezing (its in the article). The problem for the urban areas is that ebola seems to persist (as long as its in a fluid) and its so infectious (small threshold exposure). The two may conspire to create an issue that 99.99% clean isn't clean enough. Thus, discharged fluids even in small amounts may very well transmit the virus in trace amounts (again, in the linked piece). From there its purely semantic about whther or not 'water vapour' or 'aerosolized liquids' are equal to "airborne". As you allude, eath pathogen may be airborne in various ways (the air has many pollutants and impurities).
hga 12y ago
A statement from the WHO, which I don't have a lot of respect for, but unlike the US CDC, I haven't yet caught them lying about Ebola (as opposed to arguably necessary optimism, they're not about to state they've written West Africa off, at least at this stage). Most of it is correct from my knowledge of things, and the statements about saliva, tears and sweat sound plausible: http://who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/ http://who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/

by hga 12y ago

001sky 12y ago

Ebola is in the various fluids discharged by coughing and sneezing (its in the article). The problem for the urban areas is that ebola seems to persist (as long as its in a fluid) and its so infectious (small threshold exposure). The two may conspire to create an issue that 99.99% clean isn't clean enough. Thus, discharged fluids even in small amounts may very well transmit the virus in trace amounts (again, in the linked piece). From there its purely semantic about whther or not 'water vapour' or 'aerosolized liquids' are equal to "airborne". As you allude, eath pathogen may be airborne in various ways (the air has many pollutants and impurities).

hga 12y ago

A statement from the WHO, which I don't have a lot of respect for, but unlike the US CDC, I haven't yet caught them lying about Ebola (as opposed to arguably necessary optimism, they're not about to state they've written West Africa off, at least at this stage). Most of it is correct from my knowledge of things, and the statements about saliva, tears and sweat sound plausible: http://who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/ http://who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/