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

WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 260 posts

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#21

Post by pixl97 »

trvz wrote: post #15
jmyeet wrote: post #8

First hantavirus now this. Look, there's valid reason to be concerned here but people who are fearing a repeat of the Covid-19 pandemic are seemingly missing why Covid was a pandemic. Covid spread so much for four main reasons: 1. It could spread airborne; 2. It spread relatively easily. Not quite measles-level of contagiousness but still, pretty good; 3. Unlike something like the flu, there really wasn't any kind of…

> People with the flu tend to self-isolate showing symptoms. Do you have any other fantasy tales you’d like to tell?

Yea, I recently caught flu from someone else that "could not miss their work". So these things don't really apply well to the US at all.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#22

Post by picsao »

thinkcontext wrote: post #7

I read elsewhere that this strain is less deadly than previous strains. I'm no epidemiologist but being less deadly could allow it to spread further, which is obviously concerning. Also, the article says surveillance picked up the spread late. I wonder if the US's pulling back from the WHO and other international functions had anything to do with this, it used to make up a big chunk of its resources and staff.

The WHO is just another politically subverted organization. It declared covid for half an eternity as not airborne. If its connected with a loos of face or economic short term losses- many actors will put the pressur on to prevent the declaration of an pandemic or other travell restrictions.

The us is not involved in this mess.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#23

Post by soared »

thrownthatway wrote: post #17
jmyeet wrote: post #8

First hantavirus now this. Look, there's valid reason to be concerned here but people who are fearing a repeat of the Covid-19 pandemic are seemingly missing why Covid was a pandemic. Covid spread so much for four main reasons: 1. It could spread airborne; 2. It spread relatively easily. Not quite measles-level of contagiousness but still, pretty good; 3. Unlike something like the flu, there really wasn't any kind of…

[flagged]

I’ll solve the second to last one for you! I know multiple people who had Covid, and very quickly died, of Covid.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#24

Post by radu_floricica »

jmyeet wrote: post #8

First hantavirus now this. Look, there's valid reason to be concerned here but people who are fearing a repeat of the Covid-19 pandemic are seemingly missing why Covid was a pandemic. Covid spread so much for four main reasons: 1. It could spread airborne; 2. It spread relatively easily. Not quite measles-level of contagiousness but still, pretty good; 3. Unlike something like the flu, there really wasn't any kind of…

2, 3 and 4 apply to the hantavirus as well.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#25

Post by alamortsubite »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #12
thinkcontext wrote: post #7

I read elsewhere that this strain is less deadly than previous strains. I'm no epidemiologist but being less deadly could allow it to spread further, which is obviously concerning. Also, the article says surveillance picked up the spread late. I wonder if the US's pulling back from the WHO and other international functions had anything to do with this, it used to make up a big chunk of its resources and staff.

I was wondering about that with the hantavirus, whereby if it's got a higher fatality rate then it's less likely to be easily transmitted. Is that like a general rule, or pure bunk? (I'd probably assume the answer 'depends').

Definitely, but the hantavirus incubation period ranges from 1-8 weeks after exposure.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#27

Post by mlinhares »

RobotToaster wrote: post #19
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was wondering about that with the hantavirus, whereby if it's got a higher fatality rate then it's less likely to be easily transmitted. Is that like a general rule, or pure bunk? (I'd probably assume the answer 'depends').

I don't think it's just fatality rate, but also how long it takes to kill you. HIV is a great example of a disease that (untreated) has near 100% mortality rate, but can spread because it takes years to kill you.

The real issue with HIV is that you can easily spread it before being symptomatic, so far we haven’t seen hantavirus spreading before folks become symptomatic. The strain that spreads through humans has been active in south America for a while as well and hasn’t really gone anywhere yet.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#28

Post by gib444 »

trvz wrote: post #15
jmyeet wrote: post #8

First hantavirus now this. Look, there's valid reason to be concerned here but people who are fearing a repeat of the Covid-19 pandemic are seemingly missing why Covid was a pandemic. Covid spread so much for four main reasons: 1. It could spread airborne; 2. It spread relatively easily. Not quite measles-level of contagiousness but still, pretty good; 3. Unlike something like the flu, there really wasn't any kind of…

> People with the flu tend to self-isolate showing symptoms. Do you have any other fantasy tales you’d like to tell?

I swear there is an element of the virus that drives you out of isolation, to spread it?.

It always goes like this with me, the first few days:

- Hm, am I coming down with something? Not too sure. Feel a bit under the weather

- I'm feeling great! Let's go shopping/for coffee/to the supermarket/see friends

- OHH I definitely have flu

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#30

Post by fpaf »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #12
thinkcontext wrote: post #7

I read elsewhere that this strain is less deadly than previous strains. I'm no epidemiologist but being less deadly could allow it to spread further, which is obviously concerning. Also, the article says surveillance picked up the spread late. I wonder if the US's pulling back from the WHO and other international functions had anything to do with this, it used to make up a big chunk of its resources and staff.

I was wondering about that with the hantavirus, whereby if it's got a higher fatality rate then it's less likely to be easily transmitted. Is that like a general rule, or pure bunk? (I'd probably assume the answer 'depends').

From COVID-era discussions (when virologists were briefly the stars of every talk show) I remember one explaining that it was less about fatality rates per se and more about the length of time you could carry the virus around and be nearly asymptomatic while still able to infect others.

I understand the jury is still out on whether a virus can be considered "alive" but, like us, it is capable of replicating itself and mutating. In that sense, it benefits from the same evolution strategies as more complex beings: a strain that gets its host very sick very quickly gets a lower chance to spread to a new host and multiply.

This creates an evolutionary advantage for strains of that virus that are less aggressive or at least develop the worst symptoms more slowly and more covertly.

Post reply on HN