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

111–120 of 302 posts

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#111

Post by marcelsalathe »

timr wrote: post #91
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…

Is the current media frenzy "sensationalism"? Yes. Is there a risk here? Yes, a small one. I understand, but am frustrated by, the number of people who keep repeating "it's not airborne", as if this is some kind of definitive argument that a virus cannot spread here. Something like 80% of cold/flu infections happen via "bodily fluids" -- people snot on a surface, someone else touches the surface, then touch their fac…

Your 80% number is misleading. There is no good data on that. Flu has long been thought to be mainly transmitted through droplets, which fall to the ground quickly, rather than being dispensed in the air, being able to travel large distances (which would be truly airborne). If anything, the latest data suggest that we have actually underestimated the airborne route (relative to the droplet route).

Yes, a pandemic can occur even if the pathogen is not transmitted through there air - see HIV/AIDS.

Airborne and droplet spread make for fast spreading and hard to control epidemics. If something spreads through bodily fluids only, it's easier to do contact tracing and put the right measures in place. I think that's what people want to highlight if they say that Ebola is not airborne.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#113

Post by razster »

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…

Fear, you're not fearing this enough... Maybe we should ramp it up and make it airborne. Fear will come.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#114

Post by rnovak »

nmjohn wrote: post #88
rnovak wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love how you're complaining about people posting without authority, meanwhile not providing a reason that we should listen. Can you say hypocrite?

> I love how you're complaining about people posting without authority, meanwhile not providing a reason that we should listen. Can you say hypocrite? There is not even an ounce of hypocrisy. I didn't make any claims of the US preparedness, nor did I say anything about how the disease may or may not spread. If I was going to do that I would only do so if I had research to back it up with - and I am about to get in th…

First off, how do you know the credentials of ANYONE commenting? My "profile" doesn't have any information relating to my degrees, my work history, or anything else.

Saying people need a degree to comment is a complete joke. I can make whatever comment I want, regardless of my experience. Get over yourself dude.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#115

Post by djcapelis »

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 number of cases of infected patients is fairly small.

This is no longer true. We have no idea how many people are infected anymore because Liberia has too many patients to even keep track. They're literally thousands of beds short and it's actively doubling.

The CDC estimate is 100k-1.4m by the end of the year.

> * The vector of transmission is fluid exchange, so that reduces its ability to spread.

To some degree. It's still highly contagious, especially since it happens to cause people to tend to eject all kinds of different fluids. This is the largest spread of a BSL4 virus in history. It isn't casual.

> The chances of contracting the disease in AFRICA is fairly improbable too.

In places where it's not spreading, absolutely. In Monrovia or Freetown, there's actually a real risk and it's growing worse daily.

That's the scary part. This isn't even about what the risk is right now, though it's terrifying in comparison to where it was a month or two ago. It's about what happens two months from now.

The situation is bad now and rapidly deteriorating.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#116

Post by 001sky »

guscost wrote: post #106
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…

One thing the news stories never mention is that the death toll from malaria every day is comparable to the total deaths in this recent Ebola outbreak: http://www.malariaworld.org/lastweek

This is missing the point. Ebola is a far more dangerous pathogen. I dont think this needs further explanation.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#117

Post by Grazester »

function_seven wrote: post #78
this_user wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TKMR, BCRX and SRPT are the tickers that you are looking for.

Wow, those after-hours bumps are quite pronounced. Now wondering if I should short them, go long, or keep my sanity and stay out altogether.

If you wanted to long this stock you should have been on board more two months now. You are a lot late to the party.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#118

Post by JimboOmega »

tomelders wrote: post #95

I'm having a hard time accepting the "everyone should stop being stupid and stop panicking about Ebola" argument. To me, an uneducated observer, the problem only appears to be getting worse. And it has gotten significantly worse in spite of all the reassurances that it would not get worse. i think a lot of the vitriol aimed at people who are worried and a little freaked out by Ebola is unfair. People have lost their…

I don't see anybody panicking.

And if anything, I've seen calls for more resources, calls to "do more" about Ebola, etc. Mostly to control it in Africa.

There's the "We are losing the fight to contain Ebola" line, and there's the "it'll never spread outside west Africa" line. Both of which can be (And are, apparently) true - it may become endemic to West Africa, but much like Malaria, it won't be a threat to the developed world.

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#119

Post by guscost »

001sky wrote: post #116
guscost wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing the news stories never mention is that the death toll from malaria every day is comparable to the total deaths in this recent Ebola outbreak: http://www.malariaworld.org/lastweek

This is missing the point. Ebola is a far more dangerous pathogen. I dont think this needs further explanation.

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."

Re: CDC confirms first Ebola case diagnosed in US

#120

Post by rnovak »

rnovak wrote: post #107
kyro wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to be an authority to criticize others for speaking about a topic in which they likely have zero expertise.

proof of lack of expertise? Oh right, there is none. You don't know someones credentials over the internet. Unless you maybe divine them somehow

I didn't overlook anything, but I'm also not under the illusion that Hacker News is a peer reviewed journal. Hacker News doesn't require anything of a commentator, the only requirements are on content.

Unless you can magically ascertain the qualifications, or lack thereof, of someone, maybe you should only criticize on the content of their comments?

Post reply on HN