Well, shit. Ebola has arrived.

[ThinkBinary]

Dear America, it's your time now to have some fun (read, *Panic*) too, Sincerely, all West Africans
JK.

Hahahahaha omg that made my day... Although I am in South Africa.

 

[oscilay]

I guess we should start marketing for zombies then cuz everyone outside dies, who we gonna get traffic from?

IM has always been about adapting. I`ve heard we`re not alone in the Universe...

 

[Adore]

IM has always been about adapting. I`ve heard we`re not alone in the Universe...

LOL. Read your comment with the X Files theme song running through my mind.

 

[oscilay]

LOL. Read your comment with the X Files theme song running through my mind.

And you think that is a coincidence?!

 

[erickishere]

 

[rawr00]

People should not live their lives in complete worry and fear. It is what it is.

That being said, I believe it is actually a really good thing for such diseases to be hyped as much as possible. Ebola is actually much harder to contract than people realize. Lower Tier countries are much more at risk for infection, but extreme caution should obviously be taken by any entity. Anyway, the more coverage a particular illness receives, typically the greater the effort for creating a vaccine or effective treatment. This 'hype' could be insanely important (and thank God the internet exists to fuel the flames!), and one only needs to read a bit of history to understand just how important it is. For example, the Spanish Influenza (1918) infected 500 million people, and killed 50 - 100 million in a **cking year. One year, 100 million dead. Now, Ebola is certainly not the Spanish Flu, but the point is the same. Plagues are often 'random', quick and deadly. The more coverage this gets, the quicker the isolation, more money is spent and the greater the effort for effective treatment.

 

[jazzc]

People should not live their lives in complete worry and fear. It is what it is.

That being said, I believe it is actually a really good thing for such diseases to be hyped as much as possible. Ebola is actually much harder to contract than people realize. Lower Tier countries are much more at risk for infection, but extreme caution should obviously be taken by any entity. Anyway, the more coverage a particular illness receives, typically the greater the effort for creating a vaccine or effective treatment. This 'hype' could be insanely important (and thank God the internet exists to fuel the flames!), and one only needs to read a bit of history to understand just how important it is. For example, the Spanish Influenza (1918) infected 500 million people, and killed 50 - 100 million in a **cking year. One year, 100 million dead. Now, Ebola is certainly not the Spanish Flu, but the point is the same. Plagues are often 'random', quick and deadly. The more coverage this gets, the quicker the isolation, more money is spent and the greater the effort for effective treatment.

Black Death killed up to 80% of the population on some countries, averaging around 40% in Europe as a whole. Such things are no joke, better hyped than sorry.

 

[Heywood00d]

Just like humans cull certain species of animal to keep numbers manageable, perhaps this is natures way of culling humans.

I wonder what kind of stage a virus like this needs to reach for developed countries to close their borders and ports to arrivals from infected Countries.

 

[jazzc]

Just like humans cull certain species of animal to keep numbers manageable, perhaps this is natures way of culling humans.

Nature does not exist as an entity, it's a description of a huge number of things and their interactions.

 

[Heywood00d]

Nature does not exist as an entity.

I get that, but some people might think that viruses and the like do a good job of controlling over-population.

That's not my viewpoint, I was just throwing it out there.

 

[Trepanated]

I get that, but some people might think that viruses and the like do a good job of controlling over-population.

I think some diseases are a part of the natural regulatory mechanism in an ecosystem's population.

If a disease spreads more rapidly in a denser population then if any species reaches epidemic proportions, that disease would then regulate that population.

Food supply has the same effect in nature. Mice for example sometimes reach almost unbelievable populations in farming areas and the natural regulatory mechanism in those cases is the resulting food shortage.

In both cases, when the population gets back to a more sustainable level, things get back to normal again.

Sort of like a population thermostat.

 

[Heywood00d]

I think some diseases are a part of the natural regulatory mechanism in an ecosystem's population.

If a disease spreads more rapidly in a denser population then if any species reaches epidemic proportions, that disease would then regulate that population.

Food supply has the same effect in nature. Mice for example sometimes reach almost unbelievable populations in farming areas and the natural regulatory mechanism in those cases is the resulting food shortage.

In both cases, when the population gets back to a more sustainable level, things get back to normal again.

Sort of like a population thermostat.

That's the kind of thing I was getting at, thanks for translating it into an intelligent thought!

 

[jazzc]

I get that, but some people might think that viruses and the like do a good job of controlling over-population.

Those people are free to remove themselves from the pool gene, if they're so concerned with other people causing population growth

 

[jazzc]

I think some diseases are a part of the natural regulatory mechanism in an ecosystem's population.

That implies that something is regulating. That's why I commented above. There is no regulation (= control), no big spirit of nature keeping tabs and pressing knobs. I understand what you're trying to say, but I think that putting it like that sends the wrong implications.

 

[Heywood00d]

That implies that something is regulating. That's why I commented above. There is no regulation (= control), no big spirit of nature keeping tabs and pressing knobs. I understand what you're trying to say, but I think that putting it like that sends the wrong implications.

Not everyone looks at things from a purely scientific viewpoint.

I don't personally believe that nature is regulating population; however, I'm in no position to discount anyone else's theory / opinion.

 

[Trepanated]

That implies that something is regulating. That's why I commented above. There is no regulation (= control), no big spirit of nature keeping tabs and pressing knobs. I understand what you're trying to say, but I think that putting it like that sends the wrong implications.

I'm not implying that at all - the effect being there doesn't mean it is by design, or there is something overseeing it.

If an epidemic population is more prone to famine or disease, and that famine or disease causes said population to decline, then there is a regulatory mechanism inherent in that ecosystem.

Nothing designed it or controls it - in that example, if there is a fluctuating population and a disease that's effect is more pronounced as population increases, the mechanism is a natural part of the ecosystem.

The mechanisms evolve as the ecosystems evolve.

 

[redrubies]

Don`t worry guys, as long as we stay indoors and work 24/7 we`re safe.
So... back to work!

I went to NYC yesterday. I love NY, but every time I go through Grand Central Station, I get the creeps. The amount of germs that must be in that place...ewww. People from all over the world pass through there every day.

 

[Paulie W]

THere was a good Science AMA on reddit today. The main message was that ebola cannot spread and turn to an epidemy in the US or other "civilized nations"

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/2hy3r9/science_ama_series_ask_your_questions_about_ebola/



"Tl;dr: at the moment in the USA, we can out-doctor Ebola faster than it can infect new hosts.

1) Public health factors that are different here versus West Africa.
First of all, we have many, many more doctors, nurses and disposable personal protective gear. Simple things like disposable bed covers, gloves (yes, regular old gloves), face shields and glasses make a huge difference in a fluid-borne disease like Ebola. Underlying health tends to be better- as a populace we tend to not have HIV, malaria, tuberculosis, parasitic infections, etc. This means the immune system is likely to be more fit to fight. Given that the number of cases (and even, assuming the worst, the number of other people the DFW case exposed) is still vastly outnumbered by the medical infrastructure, the likelihood that it will spread far and rapidly, as it did in W.A., is low.
The Ebola outbreak in W.A. started in rural areas, where it was able to establish wiedspread infections- people traveling out of those areas carried it to the cities, and by that point, amplification (number of potentially infected) was high enough to overwhelm the medical systems. Whats different from previous Ebola outbreaks is that rather than killing an entire geographic area of villages so quickly no one leaves- people got sicker slower, and so they traveled. Epidemiologically speaking, Ebola was a pretty bad virus- it killed too fast to spread. This strain has mutated to where it kills a little slower, and less spectacularly, meaning one infected person can potentially infect a few more people before they are so sick people avoid them. (We call it the R0 or R-naught, of a pathogen).
A big factor in the low potential transmission int he US is that we do not handle our dead. Someone who died of an infectious disease is not going to be bathed, dressed, cleaned up, kissed, bid farewell to by the entire family- the medicos take care of that. This breaks one of the big transmission cycles in play in W.A.
Nigeria is an excellent example of what might happen here in the US- they have a solid medical infrastructure, and the cases in Nigeria arrived in the cities out of endemic areas- they were quarantined, their contacts were quarantined, and the spread there has been halted. This case in DFW will not have the same opportunity to amplify that the Sierra Leon /Liberia/Guinea infections had.
Finally, and on the slightly more paranoid end of things- we have an armed military option, in the event of an uncontrollable infection. WE're NOT talking world war Z, but quarantines can be rigidly enforced by armed people here, which is something we can't/won't/shouldn't do overseas."

 

[TheMarquis]

My vaccinehuana keeps away the Ebola

 

[whynotmakeit]

Live each day as if it were your last

.....Because one day you will be right