Ebola- keep your fingers crossed.

Thank goodness- the worst did not happen in the USA.  Or a lot of other places.

But as this sound and really pretty hopeful article keeps repeating- now is not the time to relax.  Rather it's the time try to get ahead of the virus.

Ebola cases are currently stabilizing in Guinea and Liberia; but accelerating (after a drop) in Sierra Leone.  "The exact causes of the lull are unclear." The perpetual frustration of epidemiologists; pathogens can surge, and recede- without any obvious reasons.  In this case one factor may be burial customs- the people in the epidemic areas have actually changed the practices, because of education on the risks.  People apparently can be taught.  That's hopeful, all on its own.

The long range risks are still there, alas.  With thousands still sick, and thousands of survivors sent home but possibly still infectious via semen or breast milk, the virus still has the largest chance it has ever had to get out of Africa- and into India; China; Europe...

So; fingers crossed.  Yes, we could actually get lucky.  But- I'd rather not rely on luck, when a virus is involved.

Listen to the Silence, too.

As part of our "how to understand the world" theme here; I'll point out that what the media is not saying is very often as significant as what they are.

I've been searching the web since last night; and cannot find any official news about the state of Dr. Craig Spencer, being treated for Ebola at Bellevue Hospital in NYC, that is more recent than 2 days ago.  And only one other blogger who has also noticed.  Not a peep from CNN or anyone else.

That's scaring me a bit.  The entire world seems to be assuming that of course, he'll recover; since he's being treated in the USA, etc, etc.  He did receive a blood transfusion from an Ebola survivor; several days back; and that was about the end of the updates; that he was "tolerating" the transfusion well.

This is a young man who deserves to get well, and to be appreciated for his warm humanity.  If he made any mistakes, it was the grave sin of believing what he was told by his superiors.  "This is safe." they said.

I fear the social consequences too; if he does not recover- dies- the impact on our fear and chaos levels will be very large; and very little of that would be beneficial.

Listen for when the crickets quit.

Yes! No! Maybe....Not!

So; who to believe?  About which?

I think I wouldn't worry about it, since between Governors declaring public health emergency quarantines, but not enforcing them, and nurses deciding to ignore Governors, and judges deciding their job is to judge science, not law....  you're not getting any of the choices in here, anyhow.

Crazy, yes?  This is some of the damage caused by fear-panic in plagues.
Current results; the State Troopers in Maine are no longer sure if they should obey the Governor's orders; or wait for court clarification.  Citizens - have no idea who to listen to.

There is a saying in all the armies I can check on; so old it defies attribution; "Order, counter-order, disorder."  Chaos is just around the corner; when people do not know who to follow or who to trust.

The business world has a similar Law: "Even a bad decision is better than no decision."  A little more subtle, but proven true repeatedly.  Make a bad decision?  You may find that out quickly, and change direction.  No decision?  The Universe will decide for you, and you probably won't like it.

So who's in charge here?

Yep, I don't know either.

Ebola 11 — New York City, and Mali.

And what can one say?

I hope Dr. Spencer pulls through.  I really hope he was not shedding virus in the NYC subway system Wednesday evening.  Or into the NYC sewer system, with the large resident rat population.

Will rats spread Ebola!?!  Gasp!  We just, plain, totally, absolutely DO NOT KNOW.

I guarantee you will hear a pundit from NYC today scoffing at the idea of rats becoming infected, probably citing the CDC, and, dripping scorn, "Oh, this has just never been known to happen!"  And that's totally true.  "We" haven't seen it.  You need to learn to recognize that language as intentionally misleading, however.  This is what the CDC has to say, buried in the technical bits:

"...these viruses naturally reside in an animal reservoir host or arthropod vector. They are totally dependent on their hosts for replication and overall survival. For the most part, rodents and arthropods are the main reservoirs for viruses causing VHFs. The multimammate rat, cotton rat, deer mouse, house mouse, and other field rodents are examples of reservoir hosts. "

Generally, for the entire class of viral hemorrhagic fevers.  Spencer had diarrhea before he went in to the hospital.  Ebola is known to be able to survive for 1-2 days outside the body.

And what can you do about it?  Not a darned thing.  What can the Mayor of NYC, and the Governor of NY do about it?  Not a thing; we'll just have to wait and see.

Amid all the utter nonsense still being broadcast by the major media; I found the video below yesterday.  I recommend it highly; and I'll say that scientifically, I'm in 100% agreement with this man's views.  But so far, he's the only one from the inside of the Epidemiology world who is pushing these points.  Keep in mind this is a talk to an audience primarily of his peers; highly educated public health workers.  Sometimes he talks very fast, and in jargon; but most of it is quite easily understood.

I admire Dr. Osterholm greatly- he has huge courage; and stamina, to speak out in this fashion.  It will make him no friends, and change few minds, and no one will ever thank him.  And he knows it; and keeps at it.  Someone made the mistake of placing him as Director of The Director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.  How a diligent, intelligent, articulate, and fully competent scientist wound up in that seat, I do not know.

I won't try to imbed the video here, that seems to go goofy; so just go right to YouTube.

http://youtu.be/UkMKUa0sxBQ

Incidentally, I am not at all a fan of the person who posted the video; I'd have chosen differently, but this was the only version I could find.

And in Mali.  That story is a complete heartbreaker.  The stories haven't settled yet, but it's clear it was a small child- whose mother/ or father/ or grandmother (I've seen all 3) died of Ebola in Guinea; and relatives took the the child into Mali to place it with a relative who could care for it.  Ebola rode along; on "public transport"; the child has Ebola.



As Osterholm states, repeatedly; we don't know anything about the virus in this outbreak.  And the very most dangerous thing you can do; regarding controlling panic in the population - is lie to them,  Us.  When all the people in NYC do not believe what the "authorities" tell them- then we'll have chaos.

So; gloomy.  One weird cheerful aspect; a pessimist blogger is already on record as betting that now, no more doctors will travel to West Africa to help; because they are not truly protected.

I know a bunch of doctors.  I'm going to bet the opposite.  I will bet you there is a substantial uptick in US doctors volunteering to go.  You have to be crazy to want to be a doctor in the first place, right?  There you go.  Doctors want to be needed; it's a basic motivator.  Nobody needs them more than West Africa.

And hopefully, next time- returning doctors will go to a lovely lodge on an island off Maine; and stay there relaxing for a month.  No, not 21 days.  We utterly do not know that's a real limit; it's just the one we've seen so far.

Ebola 10 - Today's Mystery.

The US seems to have escaped having Ebola get loose in the general population.  A very good thing, and very lucky thing, considering the number of bloopers from the various agencies involved.

Like Sherlock Holmes (and Broadway, presently), we are still presented with a mystery of absence; the "Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime."  The dog that did not bark.

How did Duncan's fiancée escape infection?

I'm totally delighted for her that she did, and the 3 other people who shared the apartment; but according to what we think we know about how the virus is transmitted- she should be infected; and apparently, is not.  I would not be surprised if she came down with it yet; somewhere out past the theoretical 21 day limit  Evolving to work more slowly is a good tactic for most pathogens, and is on the route to becoming non-lethal some day.  But at this point in the epidemic, emerging more slowly, with fewer symptoms, is an excellent way to escape control methods; and keep spreading.

But it's looking good at the moment.  Keep your fingers crossed.

The news from Africa is not any better, however.  And a factor to keep in mind; the headlines on Ebola today, there on Page 2, are first; "Nigeria Free Of Ebola!"  - which of course, is simply not true- the virus is pretty certainly still there in its animal hosts; what they mean is, no humans in Nigeria now have active Ebola.  That's good; but not in the least unexpected, since the infection there was always very limited, and rapidly addressed.  Second headline, much smaller font, is the information that cases in the core epidemic are still accelerating, and ability to cope with it there is still totally inadequate.  But, hey- no new cases in Dallas.

Sigh.

Ok, two useful points, I hope; both to do with panic.

Firstly, we just had a wonderful, terrific, demonstration of PANIC!!! in the USA.

Not- among the populace.  Sure, 3 hypochondriacs called 911 reporting they thought they had it; but everybody else in the USA was pretty calm about it all.

The world of "Officialdom", though- was something else.  Officials everywhere were, truly, panicking.  Making announcements, pontifications, taking "actions" to ensure your safety, blithering and blathering nonstop.  And the Press provides them with an echo chamber, to keep the PANIC! reverberating.  Sells papers, you know.

Expect that.  It will continue.  Most officials are terrified that someone will now hold them immediately responsible- for something.  And it scares the bejeepers out of them.  Particularly when some nitwit is shoving a microphone in their face and demanding what they're going to do.

Secondly - if/when you find yourself starting to panic; someday somewhere; literally— stop it.

You can stop it.  As in; find yourself panicking; and regain your self control.  I know you can; because I've done it.

I loved "caving" when I was in college; otherwise known as "spelunking."  Wonderful, top to bottom.  Good companions, good tests of yourself, fascinating biology and geology.  Great.

So, like ya do, I kept pushing myself further and further, attempting harder and harder caves.

Until; one day; I found myself under about 300 feet of solid limestone; about 1,000 feet into a crack so tiny you had to take your helmet off, push it in front of you, and turn your head sidewise; with at least another 1,000 feet yet to go; all of it that tight...

All of a sudden- I did not want to be there.

Really really did not.  Hated it.  Wanted out.  NOW.  And as my anxiety came up; I very, very seriously considered panicking; and making somebody else responsible for getting me the hell out of there.

What stopped me was the forceful realization that in all probability; if I panicked in that tiny impossible crack- no one would ever be ABLE to get me out.  And the realization grew, that panic was a very poor option; with bad probabilities for survival.  Screw the self esteem and public opinion; panic was likely going to kill me.

So, I didn't.  The only way out of here was forward.  So I went.  Then I had to go back through that crawlway again; but now, of course, I knew I could do it.  And of course ego balloons, when you emerge from the cave altogether.  Whoa, cool; when can we do that again?

But I've never forgotten the "almost".  I just about lost it.  Within millimeters.

But I didn't.

So; when you see your mayor and the sheriff panicking- remember.  You don't have to.

Ebola 9. Not yet, probably.

So here we are at Ebola Does Dallas 2.  Although now it turns out it may also be Ebola Does Frontier Airlines, Cleveland, and Akron- and maybe Fort Lauderdale and Atlanta.

The second nurse from Dallas- was in Akron, Ohio for several days, visiting family... before she went to the Cleveland airport, flew back to Dallas, and was placed in isolation the next day.  And- some sources are reporting she 'had a slight fever' before she got on the airplane.  In other words, she was "symptomatic" in Cleveland.

But hey, Frontier assures us they "cleaned the aircraft thoroughly, according to CDC guidelines" before putting it back into service.  "Flight 1143, on which the woman flew from Cleveland to Dallas/Fort Worth, was the last trip of the day Monday for the Airbus A320. But Tuesday morning the plane was flown back to Cleveland and then to Fort Lauderdale, Fla., back to Cleveland and then to Atlanta and finally back to Cleveland again...:

Then they took it out of service when notified about the ebola on board.  In other words, their cleaning was not for ebola; but just their standard.

Remember my points about wandering about in airports?  Here we are.  This is a huge vulnerability.

This is a deeply systemic weakness; quite apart from our astonishing stupidities.  Whose idea was it to ok travel to Ohio for a nurse who'd just been working closely with ebola???

Would I run from Dallas now?  Not yet.

At the moment, all the cases are associated with the hospital there.  They might be able to contain that, yet.  If we get to the point where there are a couple of new ebola cases a day in Dallas- which are not instantly relatable to the hospital; I think that would do it.  Even the very slow responses of officialdom might, at that point, be willing to roadblock Dallas; and only allow people in and out who have official reasons.  You and your family, don't qualify.

I was delighted to see the NYT actually cite "evolutionary biologists" - who study viruses - on their opinions about ebola.  I was not delighted with the messages transmitted from these scientists however- there are glaring errors - of "belief" not science.  One of the most bizarre, to me, is the repetition of "oh, we've never seen that happen." followed by the statement that therefore, obviously, it never will.

Stunning to me; this kind of thinking is now possibly the prevailing habit in both science and medicine. And I promise you, 40 years ago, that opinion would have been laughed out of any seminar; it's not only asinine; it's been proven wrong repeatedly, definitively.

Our science; our medicine, have been becoming stilted and untested, and un-culled by reality.  The truth of the value of your science it not its reproducibility; its only the repeatability of your grants.  A huge amount of science now being published is NOT reproducible; possibly as little at 10-30%;  a few are starting to worry about that.  One major driving force- try getting a grant to reproduce someone else's work.  Instant shredder.

It may be too late to worry; our world depends our out technical knowledge- and it's been compromised.

------------------------

This is from an old post here; but is precisely illustrative of the current state of our scientists; and their supposed "oversight". This guy is staggeringly out to lunch.

Used to be only ninnys didn't think problems all the way through- but it seems to be a pathway now being taught to PhDs.

The next example, which pushed me over the edge, is from BBC Science.

This professor guy (and not a minor one, but "the director of the scientific aquaculture programme at the Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) in Woods Hole, Massachusetts") is spending huge amount of money working on training aquaculture fish to come back when called, in the ocean; by a specific sound.

Then, see, they could go find some of their own food, and wouldn't always be pooping in the same toilet, but would come back when you wanted to feed- or kill them.

First try didn't work. Predators ate them, as soon as they were allowed to escape from the cage. I'll be darned.

Besides which- gosh, if you've got your fish trained to come and be fed, and the signal is a sound... exactly how long do you think it will take the predators to learn that the sound means- time to come and get fed? Right here?

I think any signal, in any medium, you can use to train your fish will emphatically be intercepted by the predators, immediately.

At first, the fish began to forage outside of the aquadome, moving in and out at the prompt of the sound, just as the researchers had hoped.

"But then we start seeing these bluefish circling our cage. And these are notorious for being ravenous and ruthless hunters," he says.

"Very frustratingly, we went back day after day to find these fish still showing up at the cage, and we couldn't for the life of us call the black sea bass back.

The tags helped the researchers to identify their bass

"They were scared to death - we went diving, and we could see them amongst the rocks, but nothing was going to make them run that gauntlet between the rocks and the cage when it would put their lives at risk."

And the fish had good reason to be scared.

When the team caught one of the bluefish and slit open its belly, they discovered 12 tiny tags - the fish that they had been attached to had already been digested.

But. Big, hopeful, news coverage on the BBC!! Hey, the funders will love it.

And his answer? Gonna build robotic sheep-dog sharks to keep the little predators away.

What a good idea.

sigh.

Ok, so the hammer is not working on this machine screw. Maybe if I hit it from the side, with more money...

Ebola 8.

Not having any fun today.  I'll keep this short, because there's plenty of "in depth!" coverage on the new Ebola patient in Dallas (not the dead one); and they're updating rapidly now.  First a nurse in Spain, following the rules, gets it; now a nurse in Dallas, following all the rules, gets it.

I would not bet the current head of the CDC will still have that job a month from now.  The noises I hear from his office do not make me think he's smart and in charge; more like he is not very bright, and is reading the Instruction Manual For Pandemics: 1. Be sure your ass is covered.  2. Prevent panic, lie all you want to achieve this.

"Clearly it must have been a protocol breach." - before any investigation, is not smart.  It would actually be better for Item 2 if you said, for the public; "Of course, we're looking into all possibilities, including that the virus may have changed.  That's unlikely; but we're watching."  But it would, of course, violate #1.

There were 2 things today that actually shocked me.  I'll pass them on:

1) In the NYT, well buried in the article, was this tidbit:

"Health officials have been monitoring 48 people in the Dallas area who may have come into direct or indirect contact with Mr. Duncan, including health care workers and Mr. Duncan’s relatives. But they said the person who tested positive was not among those under observation and had been “self-monitoring” to check for symptoms of Ebola."

Emphasis mine.  Current wording in the article is a little different now; but the statement is there.  So; the nurse infected is not even one of those thought to be at "higher risk".  I will be totally astonished if Duncan's girlfriend, and some of the others in that apartment, do not become symptomatic in the next 2 weeks (it may be that long).

And 2).  The Ebola mutation rate?  We hear it's "high"; but- I got to wondering about sample sizes, etc.

It's much, much MUCH worse than they're reporting.  The science gives the details; but the reporting does not.  I was guessing, before I dug out the science; that out of 4,000 dead, they might have sampled the DNA from, oh, maybe 4-500 people?  Since they report finding "more than 300" mutations that show this present virus is different from previous outbreaks?

Nope.

They had blood samples from 78 people; all from Sierra Leone, in the first 24 days of the outbreak.

From 78 people; they sequenced DNA from 99 viruses.

In 99 viruses, they found- "more than 300" separate mutations.  How many?  Well; 395, actually, but only 340 that are really, really different.

395 mutations found in 78 people- at one location, months ago.  Yes, that's really bad; and our journalists are either blindingly incompetent- or... worse.

I wouldn't leave Dallas today- but I might start packing the vehicle, and being sure it's full of gas.  Think that's over reacting?  Just read all the above again.

Ebola 7. Insanity in Texas.

In the previous post I stated that plagues make humans insane.

Not only insane- but broadly brain dead.  Evidently there is no one in the state of Texas with a functioning brain.

I'm guessing that sometime in the next 24 hours, it will dawn on someone- that to require the family of the Ebola patient to.... STAY IN THEIR APARTMENT FOR 21 DAYS-  is a death sentence, for all of them.

And insanely cruel.  Tell me; is there no other apartment in the city of Dallas where these "asymptomatic" people, humans we suspect; could go instead?  So that they do not have to stay in the apartment; where the sweaty sheets and vomit of the patient - either have not yet been cleaned up; or were cleaned only after hours and hours?

Insane.  Utterly inhumane.  And blindly panicked.

Scream, for those poor people- if you can find someone to scream at.

Ebola 6. The trickle of information.

A major part of "paying attention" is digging for more information than the upfront reassurances; and then sorting our the nonsense.  Can get very time consuming it you let it, of course.

Some things we "know" today, that have trickled down to us since yesterday-

The flight Thomas Duncan was on did not come directly from Monrovia, Liberia- he first flew to Brussels, spent about 7 hours in the airport there, then flew to Washington DC, Dulles airport, for another 6-7 hours (I hear) - then to Dallas and the health care debacle there.

IF the virus has mutated so that shedding of infectious particles now starts before the fever- and not only is there no barrier to that happening, but there is very high evolutionary pressure for it to happen right now- and quintillions of quintillions of virus particles to mutate- yes, he could have been shedding virus from Brussels on.  As an evolutionary ecologist; the probability of that particular mutation happening is quite hight, and I would not be at all surprise if it has already happened.  Such a mutation would escape all the barriers now in place to the virus spreading; they take your temperature; no fever? Go anywhere you want.

When I went to bed last night, we were hearing "one other person is now being confined", with no symptoms; and "there are 18 others being monitored."  Today those sources say 100 may have been "exposed"; including children in 4 different elementary schools.

Frightening.  No jokes.  Really, truly, pay attention.

A very serious question: We have one air traveler we know walked through all the procedures, and wound up in genuine "big city", and then had the opportunity to infect others (almost certainly other family members will have caught it.)  What if- this person had gone not to the USA; but to Mumbai?  Mexico City?  Nairobi? Shanghai?

The probability is increasing daily- that it has already happened.

There simply are NO good outcomes ahead.  We're not yet to the point where global pandemic is certain; but we are closer, and so far nothing being done is going to prevent it.

After the last post here, reader Reuben asked this:


 Ruben said...
Greenpa, could you please fairly quickly do a post on how we should prepare? I don't mean bullets and bunker prepare, and I know that any one of us could end up sitting beside the person who turns out to be the patient in Dallas.

But, if this becomes a bigger thing, what sort of physical and behavioural precaustions make sense to prepare?N95 masks, rubber gloves and a water filter?

Thank you.

Yike.  As I've already cited in a previous post, What would Greenpa do? - giving advice is dangerous to all concerned.  All courses may go ill.

But.  I'll tell you what I would do if I lived in Dallas.

If my kids were within one school of the 4 publicly mentioned, I would pull my kids out of school, now; and keep them out until officials announce all ebola is cleared from Dallas.

I would call my relatives or very close friends who live in a different city; at least 200 miles away; and ask if you could bring your family to stay with them "temporarily" in case of "emergency".  And I'd figure out exactly how you're going to get there.  Getting out ahead of a true outbreak is the best hope.  Once a true outbreak is in progress; you will not be allowed to leave; and the military will be manning the roadblocks.

Stock up on bleach, 50 lb bags of dried beans, and some cash.  You might reach a point where you don't want to open your door to anyone for a week, or two.

Folks, there's no guessing.

Two things for sure. 1) In a plague situation, people go crazy.  Criminals become blatant and extremely violent very quickly; non-criminals may become criminal because they are terrified.

2) The con men have their plans all in place ready to go.  They'll sell you cures, and "bug out" packages guaranteed to be everything you need- already going on.  Saw one yesterday selling herbs to bolster your immune system.  Pure bull.

You could hit a place where you are simply on your own.

The government can be very easily overwhelmed.  The CDC is "responding with full force" to the Dallas event.  They've sent 10 people.

I would give the Dallas authorities until they find 1 Ebola case in Dallas from someone they did not guess might be infected; and then I would go stay with my relatives for 2 weeks; and see how it goes.

Speed, and don't wait until it's for sure and obvious; that can be too late, and the roads will be closed.

So far; keep in mind all government responses have been to little too late- exactly as I predicted in my Aug. 8 post.  That is not at all likely to change; anywhere in the world.  7 billion people- is not sustainable- as we all know; and this is one of the reasons why.  We're food; and we've become an immense concentration of it.

Ebola 5

I would bet you've heard the news already: Ebola is inside the USA.

Sad to say; it followed my scenario posted very nearly 2 months ago, in the post "Just a bit much, and Ebola" pretty much exactly. A man got on a plane with no symptoms, and didn't show any until several days after getting off the plane in Dallas, Texas.  And was sent home undiagnosed from the hospital when he went in.

The authorities are still saying 'oh, don't worry, we'll handle it."  with the additional assurance that their methods are "tried and true."  They've been working great so far, after all.

My advice: pay very close attention.  You can already smell panic in the air.  Think now, about what your options are.

Keep in mind; there is NO, ZERO, barrier to the virus evolving around all the hopes;

It can evolve so it sheds infectious particles before symptoms show.

It can evolve to spread through the air.

It can evolve to stay infectious on surfaces for days.

And it's in a perfect situation to do any or all of those; and it's easily possible it has done so- already.  That would go far towards explaining how so many health workers are catching it and why their control measures are not working.

And- the fact that we've found one in the USA?  Suggests it may already have happened in some other world city.  Mumbai?  Mexico City?  Shanghai?

Ebola 4

So - more people are getting scared about it.  Including the BBC; which  to my amazement has this as their top headline right now: Ebola crisis: Liberia 'faces huge surge' says WHO.  Not the #1 Most Read article on the Washington Post right now; New Royal Baby!!

The BBC goes on to say "Ebola is spreading exponentially in Liberia, with thousands of new cases expected in the next three weeks, the World Health Organization (WHO) says."

I'm still not quite buying the "exponentially"; but yes, this sounds more serious.  As SquashPractice pointed out in a comment on the previous post here, Wikipedia Ebola page now does have the graph I've been looking for (new deaths and new cases / day); and it does have an "up curve", which, yes, is more scary - there are two unrelated phenomena which could account for that, without meaning Ebola is actually becoming more aggressive.  Which is not to say it's not; you understand.

The two factors; A) The reporting of new cases has possibly/likely increased dramatically in the past weeks. B) The disease is expanding- think of an ever increasing circle as it moves into the population. There will be many more infections on the circumference of the larger circle.   That's to be expected; and to me is not any more threatening than previously.

It was always expected the cases would expand, and accelerate; no mutations required.

So; bad, but not OMG we're all going to die.  The "thousands of new cases", however, do mean the risk to spread to distant cities will go up rapidly in the near future.  Keep paying attention.

So, now the bad Ebola news.  What they're not telling us.

One factor, reported in Wikipedia and nowhere else at all, so far as I can tell; the small, unrelated outbreak in the DR Congo?  Is less small; and not unrelated.

"On 20 August, several people, including four health care workers, were reported to have died of Ebola-like symptoms in the remote northern Équateur province, a province that lies about 750 miles north of the capital Kinshasa.[102] By 21 August, 13 people were reported to have died with similar symptoms."   So - at least 20 dead in DR Congo, including 4 health workers, not the 13 the WHO reports.

And: "Blood samples were sent for testing and on 24 August it was reported that the samples were positive for Ebola; one tested positive for the Sudan ebolavirus, which is a different species of ebolavirus than the one responsible for the West African outbreak; the other tested positive for a mixture of the Sudanese and Zaire species, the species that is responsible for the present outbreak in West Africa.[104][105]"

Italics mine.  Ok, that's scary, from the evolutionary standpoint.  2 virus strains are mixing (I don't use the word "species" here, I don't think it's correct.)  That means- lots more chances to evolve, now.

And one more; this is my own guess, unsupported by any official statements; I think the WHO knows, and is not telling- that the Ebola virus has already mutated to become more transmissible.

Take a look at the photos in the BBC article.  The health workers are wearing isolation outfits designed to prevent breathing in contaminants.  Which, they tell us officially, does not happen.

And also from that article: "Transmission of the virus in Liberia was "already intense", and taxis being used to transport infected patients appeared to be "a hot source of potential virus transmission", the WHO said."

Taxis?  Also - not a big source of "direct contact with body fluids".  But; if the virus can now survive in dried sweat or sneeze droplets?  That would do it; and I do think - it has already happened.

Keep paying attention.

Ebola 3

Roz just made this comment on the previous post:


          hey Greenpa - is this chart a little like what you were looking for? It's a bit scary, it is.

         BBC- Ebola-How bad can it get?

          Roz

  Good catch, Roz; I was just getting ready to make a post here about that exact article.

The graph is not what I want to see; but this is the presentation that made "that other guy" go all wacky and start saying "OMG, Ebola has gone asymptotic!"

This looks so scary because they are adding all deaths in the epidemic together to make the next point on the graph.  That's not an entirely illegitimate way to look at the numbers; but from the epidemiology standpoint, it is not as informative as a graph tracking "number of new cases this week" or "number of new deaths this week" would be.  

Those graphs give an appearance that is much less accessible to the general public - they're very jagged, and the "trend" is harder to see; and most of the jaggedness is purely accidental; caused by differences in reporting, not differences in actual infection/mortality.

Last I really looked at the numbers, the data for "new cases" looked something like "43, 17, 30, 59, 28, 37, 19, 67"  etc.   The question is "is the disease accelerating",  not "totals".  Still have not seen the data presented that way.  There are standard ways to draw a line for "best fit" that evens out the jags.  If you have a straight, but up-slanted line; that means the epidemic is still speeding up, and that's not great.  It's when that  line goes asymptotic- that it's time to be very, very scared.  Not happening yet, I think.  The WHO was reporting "new" cases in mid August; but they're not, now.  Not sure why.

That BBC article - is notable for 3 things; basically all good, actually.

 1)   It's the first "scary" article in the major press I've seen - telling the truth about the epidemic.  Yes, it's potentially dangerous, to the entire world.

  2) The author did a good job of talking to researchers, and translating for the public.  That's been very uncommon on the BBC in the past few years, and getting worse; but this one is excellent.

  3)  Some of the researchers raised good points I had not thought of in particular, which could easily lead to epidemic outcomes that are less than apocalyptic.  That would be nice.  In particular, the scenario where the virus mutates to "more transmissible"; which could then lead to evolving to "less lethal" more quickly than if it stays as it is.  Reaching a point where it never goes away, but subsides to normal "bad disease" status, where it is all around the world; it still makes people very sick during outbreaks, but maybe only 5% of infected people die.  

That's actually a fairly high probability in the evolution of pathogens scenarios.  I was focusing on the vastly increased chances for it to become easier to catch; now that there are uncountably more virions available for evolution to act on.  That's very scary.  But yes; the next evolutionary tactic is usually to: stop killing your host.

I recommend folks read that article.  Twice; once today, and again in a couple days.  Lots of information to absorb there, and it's far more honest than other stuff still being circulated.

There are several other hopeful developments too; like the preliminary finding that there may be many people in the region who are already immune to Ebola; for reasons they're guessing at.  Fewer susceptible people would be a huge help.  And; those fighting the disease think they may be able to use blood from those who managed to survive the infection to treat active patients.  That would sure help.

All in all; keep paying attention.  But total imminent world collapse is looking a little less likely - from Ebola, anyway.

Ebola 2.

The Ebola news is not great.  I'm a little more worried than previously; enough that I have added the WHO reports URL to my news menu bar, and check it daily.  This is where most of the press get their update information; and if you look at this one from yesterday, you'll see that - the press is not passing on the news: Ebola now in Congo; different strain.

Also; the Washington Post is reporting research from Harvard that the mutation rate in the main outbreak is "very high".

And the BBC reports that the WHO expects 20,000 cases before they can bring the outbreak "under control".  We're a little under 3,000 cases right now.  That's a big expansion.

All that adds up to significantly increased risks that the virus may become more transmissible; and also that the virus may escape much further away from current sites.  Maybe into a big city.

The fact that the press is not putting all this together, and passing it all on quickly - indicates official actions to suppress news, and decrease panic potential - so you can't believe what they're telling you.

So; as before; pay attention.

It's just all a bit much. And, Ebola.

Hi Guys.

According to Blogger- you're all still here, tuned in.  I'm honored.

The reasons I've been quiet are still the same; massive overloads In Real Life - and a lack of anything genuinely useful to say about current world insanities.

Today, though; I do have something useful to tell you; out of my particular Biology/Evolution/Etc. background.

We're experiencing the largest outbreak seen of the Ebola virus.  Should you worry?  Or not?

You need to pay attention, is what you need to do.  (Not to me.  To what's going on.)

So far I have seen a great many of the disasters, problems, conundrums that are known to occur during "plague" outbreaks; already happening.  We have history to look at; I recommend it.  People can be harmed in epidemics by many things other than the bug itself.

Here is a list of "Already here" bad things, that do not help:

Politicians lying about the extent of the epidemic.
Politicians telling you :"There's no risk to us!"  then- 'There's almost no risk to us!"  And I've already seen "We'll probably get a case or 2 inside the US, but we can handle it."
Press printing any blathering nonsense they can find.
Finger-pointing between nations and agencies.
New committees.
An experimental "cure" - with a tiny supply; and fights about who gets it.
Con men selling fake cures to desperate people.  (saw an ad on Facebook already)
Wall Street types jockeying to capture the profits.
Military roadblocks going up - and cities sealed off - too late.
Desperate people sneaking through roadblocks, and bribing their way.
Soothsayers announcing "This is IT!  Run!"
Panic.

All of those are happening now; and will likely get worse.

Here's my "no bull" advice.

Don't panic.  It doesn't help.  Is this virus dangerous - to you and your family?  Yes, it is; but we don't know how it's going to turn out.  Disease organisms follow the "rules of Epidemiology" - when you can average 1,000 different viruses and bacteria together.  Individually - they do not have to follow anyone's rules.  It could mutate to be more infectious; or less.  Or both, on different expansion fronts.

This scenario is possible: You live in Denver?  Far from everything.  But; the incubation period for Ebola is stated as "between 2 and 21 days."  That's really dangerous.  An infected person, at day 15 of his infection; gets on a plane.  Yes, he might be shedding virus by then.  Gets off the plane in Cairo, Egypt, 2 hours later, having transmitted it to 2 other people; the steward, and the lady in the next seat.

He stays in Cairo, vanishes into the countryside and is never recognized as dying of Ebola.  The steward flies next to Paris, becomes symptomatic and infectious 17 days later, infecting an entire flight crew...  and on; until an infected but not yet symptomatic person gets off the plane in Denver... goes to a rock concert/ all night rave-revival party - throws up...

"It's not likely!"  No, it's not; but the bigger the epidemic gets, the more chances; and there's really no way to prevent that kind of scenario - short of shutting international air traffic; off.

If that happens?  You'll know it's getting serious; and that it's too late to be effective, and the next step is martial law.  In Denver?  Yes.

This kind of thing has happened repeatedly, historically, in plague events, going back to Rome, at least.  But they didn't have air traffic; or the Mexico City slums - etc.

This virus is not capable of suddenly mutating into a disease that can blow in the air from somewhere miles away.  An epidemic in Africa is not a threat to you - today.  One case in NYC - is not much threat even to NYC.  If, however, we wake up one day and there are 2,000 new cases in NYC today- that's a threat.  Neither hospitals nor police will be able to control things.

Think about what you can do, if you have to.  I would say start thinking now.

And the statistic I would watch is the daily CHANGE in death rate and infection rate.  That was a  lot of the reason I decided to write this; I've already seen one "seer" shrieking "It's gone asymptotic!!"  My respect for that source dropped through the floor; not that it was all that high.  Just as pure statistics; that's crap.  Yes, there's a jog up in deaths and new cases - in the past 2 days.  It could very easily be a pure fluke; better reporting yesterday, for example.  The probability of "fluke" is much higher than "asymptotic!"

If the rate of change keeps climbing up for a week- yes, I'd start to worry.  If the rate of increase keeps going up for 2 weeks, with no break; I would have to predict that a great many people will die before it's over; but we still cannot know when, or where, it could suddenly shift into a trivial virus.

Like everything else in our future now; we do not know what will happen next.

Keep an eye on the Wikipedia "ebola" page.  Seriously.  I know, that used to be a joke line; but it's not anymore.  It is the only source of information on the technical knowledge of the virus that just says this; right up front: "Transmission: It is not entirely clear how Ebola is spread."  That's from a CDC document; not one I could find, but its cited here.  The WHO at the moment is putting out the official line that "ebola is very hard to catch, and requires direct 'bodily fluids' contact".  The Russian weapons experts are saying "maybe not."

 The great majority of sources will have some "agenda" they want you to swallow.  Wikipedia now has dozens of actual experts monitoring the information changes - and if you put something up that anyone can criticize as "not true" - down it comes. 

Don't panic.  Pay attention.

And find a copy of Sinclair Lewis's "Arrowsmith" - a novel about exactly this situation; from the viewpoint of the medical researcher.  They gave him the Pulitzer Prize for that novel; and he refused it. His insights into human behavior during a plague - are... well, Pulitzer material.

The entire text is online; here; Arrowsmith text   Public domain, pretty sure.
--------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE: 8/14 - I managed to find the WHO current statistics page.  They report new totals for deaths and new cases, every 2-3 days.  There are lots of ups and downs in the numbers- imagine the difficulties of "counting", and reporting, in the middle of it all.  It's clearly horrific for those caught in it. Overall, it does appear that new cases and numbers of new deaths are increasing; but it's a long way from "asymptotic."  Somebody out there - could use these data to produce a good graph.  I'd rather see a graph of new cases and new deaths than total cases and total deaths, and I haven't seen one.  I'd do it; but- several people would kill me if I stole that time.  :-)