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

Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 92 posts

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#41

Post by hackuser »

blergh123 wrote: post #26
rustyconover wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To borrow an idea from math, "doing good" isn't a commutative, infections and diseases are. Have some respect for others and slow your roll before going out during the 21 day post exposure window. It's a bit like saying, "Hey I've saved lives over here so I have earned the right to be irresponsible over here". Because you know, karma balances out. No, the world doesn't work like that. And you aren't doing any good pr…

I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example.

> I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example.

I would suggest to everyone: Don't comment on questions like this one (how Ebola spreads) unless you know for certain what you are saying and can back it up. We have complete saturation of rumors and bad information; adding to it won't improve the situation.

I don't mean to criticize the commenter above; they just happened to have the top-most comment of this kind.

EDIT: What a strong signal of over-reaction when a post that says you should know what you are talking about, on HN, is modded down. (I don't care how it's modded, it's just depressing to see this response here.)

EDIT: The same applies to my other post, which asks serious, legitimate questions in a non-offensive way. How sad.

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#42

Post by shirro »

The smart thing would be for aid agencies that send workers to these hot spots to pay for their employees to stay in a nice quite "resort" somewhere for a month on their return for them to relax and as a thankyou for their efforts. And to deflect growing negative public opinion about the risks returning aid workers pose. Needless to say the "resort" could have daily health checks and minimal contact between people but could otherwise be quite pleasant.

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#43

Post by [deleted] »

googler_314 wrote: post #12

Before judging this man for going bowling etc., we should bear in mind that he caught Ebola working for Doctors without Borders in Guinea. I would guess that without workers like him, the risk to Americans and others outside Africa, would be much higher, since the disease would be spreading much faster within Africa. Hopefully he recovers and we can improve travel policies if necessary.

[deleted]

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#44

Post by [deleted] »

jberryman wrote: post #40
westward wrote: post #24

Based on the timeline, he had to have contracted Ebola pretty much the day he left. That seems pretty unusual, isn't it? How long was he there, a couple months? "Symptoms usually occur within eight to 10 days of infection and Dr. Spencer had been home nine days when he reported feeling ill." That's not including travel time local and international. That's a tight schedule!

I think this is something like selection bias: had he contracted ebola earlier he wouldn't have returned to the US, or maybe would have been shipped back for treatment, which would be a very different headline.

[deleted]

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#45

Post by Houshalter »

knappador wrote: post #28

How about "Doctor Returning From Guinea..." to more accurately reflect the geographic relationship instead of creating a bomb of a headline as if some random, yet-unknown vector resulted in Ebola in New York.

Why does it matter who he was? The title is pretty accurate.

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#46

Post by hackuser »

This response is poor risk management. I'm not sure the risk is significant: What is the chance that someone else will get infected? Higher than the many other risks we face every day?

What is higher risk?: 1) Going to the Ebola zone in W. Africa (EDIT: And taking the proper precautions to protect yourself), 2) Walking as a pedestrian on NY streets, or 3) Sharing a subway car with someone who has been in the Ebola zone?

There are around 3 cases of Ebola in the United States. I expect most of the resultant suffering will be because the public reaction is causing us to divert resources from where they could do more good (including West Africa).

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#47

Post by tsotha »

westward wrote: post #24

Based on the timeline, he had to have contracted Ebola pretty much the day he left. That seems pretty unusual, isn't it? How long was he there, a couple months? "Symptoms usually occur within eight to 10 days of infection and Dr. Spencer had been home nine days when he reported feeling ill." That's not including travel time local and international. That's a tight schedule!

That's just the average. It can be over 42 days.

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#48

Post by TrevorJ »

malandrew wrote: post #32
ChuckMcM wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He knew the risks that he could possibly be infected > and decided to endanger others when he could have > easily stayed home That may be over stating things. Given that he is a doctor, and he is confident in his process with keeping clean, he might actually have a really hard time believing that he was infected. People have faith in their own abilities, that lets them do things which might put them at grave risk.…

You can fight the deleterious effects on support of quarantining by making the quarantining fun/enjoyable/pleasant. Choose a remote resort location, rent it out for the duration of the crisis, send everyone there to sit out their quarantine in comfort. I wouldn't mind a 21 day quarantine on a beach or camping

You can't send everybody to the same quarantine, they would all end up infected.

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#49

Post by 001sky »

hackuser wrote: post #41
blergh123 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example.

> I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example. I would suggest to everyone: Don't comment on questions like this one (how Ebola spreads) unless you know for certain what you are saying…

This (above) comment has no citations and the one you are responding to (GP) is substantially correct.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15588056

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4113787/

Ebola and Marburg viruses are the sole members of the genus Filovirus in the family Filoviridae. There has been considerable media attention and fear generated by outbreaks of filoviruses because they can cause a severe viral hemorrhagic fever (VHF) syndrome that has a rapid onset and high mortality. Although they are not naturally transmitted by aerosol, they are highly infectious as respirable particles under laboratory conditions. For these and other reasons, filoviruses are classified as category A biological weapons. However, there is very little data from animal studies with aerosolized filoviruses. Animal models of filovirus exposure are not well characterized, and there are discrepancies between these models and what has been observed in human outbreaks. Building on published results from aerosol studies, as well as a review of the history, epidemiology, and disease course of naturally occurring outbreaks, we offer an aerobiologist's perspective on the threat posed by aerosolized filoviruses."

or

Our study has shown that Lake Victoria marburgvirus (MARV) and Zaire ebolavirus (ZEBOV) can survive for long periods in different liquid media and can also be recovered from plastic and glass surfaces at low temperatures for over 3 weeks. The decay rates of ZEBOV and Reston ebolavirus (REBOV) plus MARV within a dynamic aerosol were calculated. ZEBOV and MARV had similar decay rates, whilst REBOV showed significantly better survival within an aerosol."

Reston is not Ebola, but a close relative.

Re: Doctor in New York City Is Sick with Ebola

#50

Post by fourstar »

tsotha wrote: post #47
westward wrote: post #24

Based on the timeline, he had to have contracted Ebola pretty much the day he left. That seems pretty unusual, isn't it? How long was he there, a couple months? "Symptoms usually occur within eight to 10 days of infection and Dr. Spencer had been home nine days when he reported feeling ill." That's not including travel time local and international. That's a tight schedule!

That's just the average. It can be over 42 days.

Got a source for that?
Post reply on HN