Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 302 posts

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#171

Post by davesque »

etimberg wrote: post #166
callahad wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there is this: "While all Ebola virus species have displayed the ability to be spread through airborne particles (aerosols) under research conditions, this type of spread has not been documented among humans in a real-world setting, such as a hospital or household." Cite: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/spb/mnpages/dispages/Fact_She... I could've sworn that Ebola-Reston was airborne-transmissible in real-world s…

Ebola has been theorized to be airborne by scientists at the National Microbiology laboratory in Winnipeg. Cite from 2012: http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/121115/srep00811/full/srep00...

Theorized but not conclusively shown, as the "Discussion" section in that study indicates. Transmission may have occurred due to large droplets or fomites contacting the mucosal membranes of the monkeys.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#172

Post by NearAP »

joe_the_user wrote: post #101
comrh wrote: post #4

Am I correct in assuming that cultural differences concerning death and the dead along with our healthcare system mean Ebola in America would be relatively containable?

Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia are some of the most poorest countries on earth. Liberia especially is haunted by its brutal, child-soldier fueled civil war and the entire society is rather rickety. Nigeria, not even the most advanced nation in Africa, seems to have been able to contain Ebola, according to the CDC [1]. There have been isolated cases in European nations that didn't lead to an outbreak. So I think the…

I think one of the reasons why Nigeria was able to contain it compared to Liberia and other countries was an awareness of the disease and the enlightenment campaign from the Government. From initial reports that I read, folks in Liberia didn't really believe it was a 'sickness' till it started killing people. Some of them also first tried 'traditional medicine' and only started going to hospitals when things became really bad. There were also reports that folks were not keeping away from people who were under quarantine believing it wasn't really a disease.

On the other hand, by the time the disease arrived Nigeria, the media was already awash with the number of people who had died and so folks were already aware that this was a deadly disease and started taking the necessary precautions. This coupled with a massive enlightenment campaign by the Government helped tremendously.

If you apply the same principle to the US (awareness and if necessary enlightenment campaign), I think your nervousness will be further reduced.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#173

Post by guscost »

privong wrote: post #152
guscost wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The death toll from malaria throughout history is orders and orders of magnitude beyond that of Ebola. I don't see how there is any way you can accurately describe it as "a far more dangerous pathogen."

You are taking "dangerous" to mean "total number of people killed", while an equally reasonable definition is "likelikhood of dying if you contract it". It all depends on what criteria is being used to define "dangerous".

Absolutely. I'm using the word in the sense of a "public health hazard" rather than the "likelihood of not having a good time once you personally are infected" but there is a valid case for not wanting to contract either disease.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#174

Post by crimsonalucard »

kenjackson wrote: post #168

If you were on a plane coming back from Europe and the guy in the seat next to you said he was just coming back from spending a year in Liberia, what would you do? Would you sit there and just make sure he didn't spit on you? Or would you go sit in the bathroom for the flight? Curious as to how people would react...

Well it depends on whether that guy has Ebola or not.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#175

Post by themgt »

lee wrote: post #110
arrrg wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The likelihood of any kind of pandemic is extremely low, sure. However, your dismissal of this epidemic and its impact is arrogant and disgusting. It’s still a disaster in the affected countries, with many knock-on effects. Also, it would have been better to spend more money earlier to prevent unnecessary deaths. This Ebola epidemic is actually something people hardly care about. Hardly anyone is donating, for exampl…

I don't know if you can call it a disaster. The total number of cases, as reported by the CDC, is less than 7000 so far. I don't mean to be callous, but compare that number to the number of total deaths to Malaria or even the flu, and that number pales in comparison. I am not callous to say that we shouldn't care about the Ebola outbreak, but if you look at the numbers, directing that money to buy more mosquito nets…

I will stop being concerned about Ebola as soon as I start seeing this log-scale graph start bending down hard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Evolution_of_the_2014_Ebol...

And note the WHO already did bend the curve down once before, back when there were only a couple hundred cases, and then they lost control again. Not confidence-inspiring.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#176

Post by ackalker »

Headline: "First confirmed case of Ebola confirmed in the United States: CDC"

Article: "[...] an unnamed patient was being tested for Ebola [...]" (emphasis mine)

Besides the obvious pleonasm in the title ("confirmed [...] confirmed" doesn't make it doubly so), nowhere in the article does it say that anyone is certain that this man actually has Ebola, as obviously, tests are still being done. Until the results of these tests are in, there is no confirmation.

Is this some kind of reading comprehension test being dumped on HN? For what nefarious, crowd sourced, statistical research project?

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#177

Post by sanxiyn »

davycro wrote: post #112

Could be worse. The pandemic will start if Ebola spreads to a low-resource country with a large urban population. Worst case, in my opinion, would be an Ebola case diagnosed in Johannesburg.

Ebola already spread to Nigeria, but it seems to be contained now. Nigeria has more urban population but less resource than South Africa, so I don't think South Africa is the worst case.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#178

Post by arrrg »

ackalker wrote: post #176

Headline: "First confirmed case of Ebola confirmed in the United States: CDC" Article: "[...] an unnamed patient was being tested for Ebola [...]" (emphasis mine) Besides the obvious pleonasm in the title ("confirmed [...] confirmed" doesn't make it doubly so), nowhere in the article does it say that anyone is certain that this man actually has Ebola, as obviously, tests are still being done. Until the results of the…

The patient was tested in two different laboratories (CDC and another one in Texas). The test is “highly accurate”. It’s Ebola.

Watch the video embedded in this to get the verbatim statement of the director of the CDC: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/01/health/airline-passenger-w...

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#179

Post by SpaceManNabs »

arrrg wrote: post #92
lee wrote: post #75

Am I one of the minorities who believe that this hype about Ebola is more sensationalism and news than an actual pandemic we should be fearful for? Let's take a lot at what we can agree on: * The number of cases of infected patients is fairly small. * The vector of transmission is fluid exchange, so that reduces its ability to spread. * The virus doesn't appear to lie dormant, and is only contagious when the patient…

The likelihood of any kind of pandemic is extremely low, sure. However, your dismissal of this epidemic and its impact is arrogant and disgusting. It’s still a disaster in the affected countries, with many knock-on effects. Also, it would have been better to spend more money earlier to prevent unnecessary deaths. This Ebola epidemic is actually something people hardly care about. Hardly anyone is donating, for exampl…

I am having a hard time understanding why people keep saying that donations are the way to go to solve this issue. From what I have seen, many rural communities are rejecting and acting against foreign assistance. I am not sure of the circumstances in urban settings, but I read that they are just as superstitious. How can we help those that do not want our help, especially when it is deadly to help either because of the disease or fear of attack?

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#180

Post by ackalker »

arrrg wrote: post #178
ackalker wrote: post #176

Headline: "First confirmed case of Ebola confirmed in the United States: CDC" Article: "[...] an unnamed patient was being tested for Ebola [...]" (emphasis mine) Besides the obvious pleonasm in the title ("confirmed [...] confirmed" doesn't make it doubly so), nowhere in the article does it say that anyone is certain that this man actually has Ebola, as obviously, tests are still being done. Until the results of the…

The patient was tested in two different laboratories (CDC and another one in Texas). The test is “highly accurate”. It’s Ebola. Watch the video embedded in this to get the verbatim statement of the director of the CDC: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/01/health/airline-passenger-w...

'Was' obviously is in past tense. If there is high likelyhood of it being Ebola, the article should have made that clear in the very first (few) paragraphs, like stating that further tests are being done to strengthen the confirmation.

Edit: Ah, I understand now that the CDC has a rather peculiar definition of "case" of illness, see giarc's comment below for a link.

Post reply on HN