Non-American members: Ebola?

webecedarian · 15 Oct 2014, 10:58 AM

As I'd said, I love that this is a fairly international forum - as a matter of fact, I don't even know where EMD is based, which would normally make me leery - since most of the forums I participate in are close to 100% American. And I realized that there are often questions I've been curious about, with not many opportunities to ask, so I should try here, especially since the Lounge tends to be rather languid.

If you're not in the U.S. - how is your country reacting to the Ebola threat? Is it all over your news? Is it simply presented as news, or is there fear-mongering? It's one of the dominant stories in network television news, despite the fact that there are barely a few cases in a population of 300,000,000.

n5bb · 15 Oct 2014, 11:40 AM

I'm in the Dallas TX area (not outside the US). But since the only Ebola cases in North America during this latest outbreak developed 13 miles from my house, I thought I might comment. Since 48 persons in contact with the original patient from Africa (who unfortunately died a few days ago) are still being monitored, and 76 hospital workers are being monitored, it's a major issue here. One nurse so far is known to have caught Ebola from the patient.

Ebola is in the news because it seems to spread very easily to those who have contact with the body (or bodily fluids) of an infected person expressing symptoms. A nurse who was treating the Liberian man in the Dallas hospital came down with the disease (even though she was taking normal safety precautions), and fortunately she now seems to be recovering. Many medical workers in western Africa have died due to Ebola, and this threat to the medical staffs is causing great concern. The healthcare systems in some African countries are in danger of complete collapse due to Ebola at this time.

The other dangerous issue with regards to Ebola is that no symptoms are expressed for several days after the disease is contracted. So the man who flew from western Africa to Dallas with Ebola had no symptoms during the flight and for some time afterward. This means that this dangerous disease can spread rapidly to remote locations very rapidly, since the carriers don't know they carry the disease and so may travel on aircraft to any part of the world.

Bill

Tsunami · 18 Oct 2014, 11:01 PM

There is concern in Europe, but not true panic as yet. It is a big issue in Spain though, as a nurse has been infected there without having been in Africa, she got the virus from treating a patient with the virus who had just returned from Africa. Since that event, 1 or 2 more cases occured in Spain, and the spouses and closest friends of those infected had to be quarantained temporarily too.

Outside of Spain, panic seems to not be concrete yet, concern however is here. Some flights to affected African countries have been cancelled, and medical staff have been given special suits and training on how to deal with ebola patients should one of them end up in Belgium. So we're in the stage of not causing panic, but preparing just in case we'd be confrontated with an ebola patient.

A somewhat odd thing is how the disease even penetrated into worlds that have nothing to do with medical cases. Some football (soccer) clubs had African players who had to fly to Africa and back to represent their national team. Even while none of them had to play in a dangerous area of the continent, some clubs did do a checkup upon the return of the players.

Our new (we have new government since exactly a week ago) minister of Healthcare, has stated there is no need for special rules for now, since there has not been any ebola case in the country as yet and panic is unnecessary (she says). I guess those emergency plans are well thought of just in case we'd see an infected person on Belgian soil, but for now they try to keep people calm and tell them not to worry. Travel to West Africa is disencouraged though.

webecedarian · 23 Oct 2014, 11:47 AM

Yes, but, Tsunami, where are you? I mean, apart from "in between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown." Belgium? I've heard that about the athletes, and some students (from uninfected African countries!) have even been turned away.

Interesting Bill/n5bb, that you're able to chime in from Dallas. But, if you don't mind my saying so, the main reason it's in the news, it seems to me, is that it's typical network fear-mongering, and even more so locally. Like the first West Nile panic in New York, although hardly any cases developed. But it's so frightening and dramatic, it grabs headlines, like murders.

What struck me so far is that of the very few cases in America, there seems to be a much better recovery rate. As a matter of fact, it's even been clamped down on successfully in some African countries. Yes, of course it's frighteningly contagious under certain conditions, but maybe just good medical infrastructure would dramatically lower the mortality rate?

**Gankaku** · 26 Oct 2014, 05:12 AM

You know, I was just thinking...I know Ebola is scary and all...why aren't people as scared of malaria and dengue fever? They are extremely easy to catch (via mosquito rather than bodily fluids), are both killer diseases as well, and more people get those diseases every year than ebola. There are no known cures for either malaria or dengue, other than management of fluid dehydration and to make the person comfortable. I suppose Ebola causes more terrible suffering? I don't know. Thoughts?

n5bb · 26 Oct 2014, 06:59 AM

Ebola kills patients rather quickly and is hard to treat. Unfortunately, it's spreading very rapidly and is overloading the medical care systems of some western Africa countries. There are only a few locations in the US which offer the high level of isolation which appears to be needed to keep medical staff safe (as we saw with the two nurses in Dallas, who are now Ebola-free after extensive treatment).

The major issue is the rapid growth of a disease with a mortality risk of about 50%:
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/20...rhaps-spreads/

So far, Ebola is only a problem in a few western Africa countries (and to a much lesser extent the Democratic Republic of the Congo in central Africa, which has an unrelated outbreak of a different Ebola strain). See:
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/notices

Dallas County (which is mostly the City of Dallas, Texas) had 4 deaths of West Nile related virus in 2006, and 2 deaths in 2013. West Nile is a mosquito borne virus.

Bill

**Gankaku** · 26 Oct 2014, 08:24 AM

I guess the mortality rate is less with dengue and malaria since it's about 50% with ebola. However, 12,500 die yearly from dengue and in 2012 alone malaria killed nearly 800,000.

beeboy · 27 Oct 2014, 05:37 AM

Canada here.

I'm disappointed government did not monitor travellers closer at the get-go and apply restrictions and counter measures.
Yes, perhaps human rights issues may have been ruffled but sometimes its for the greater good.

Downplaying the seriousness of the disease by north american governments is not helpful.

bramhall · 3 Nov 2014, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beeboy

Canada here.
I'm disappointed government did not monitor travellers closer at the get-go and apply restrictions.

No Canada visas for Ebola countries. Are you happier now?

Tsunami · 21 Nov 2014, 12:26 AM

I am in Belgium indeed. We have so far no special arrangements to my knowledge, although some people coming directly from African countries affected by Ebola would be scanned or followed apparently. I am not sure of the exact details though. We haven't got any major new rules applying because of Ebola, maybe that will change if we'd have a concrete cause of Ebola within the borders of the country though...

janusz · 21 Nov 2014, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsunami

I am in Belgium indeed. We have so far no special arrangements to my knowledge,.

A British tabloid reports on 20 Nov:

Quote:

Brussels Airport has announced that it will begin screening passengers arriving from Ebola-stricken countries Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Source

Tsunami · 21 Nov 2014, 11:18 PM

It could be true, although it seems to be a very new measure. But people have indicated some worries about passengers coming from Africa, so maybe the government is step by step beginning to get concerned. But if it's limited to only these countries, I'd say we're still quite flexible ; other countries have shown greater worries before. I guess the government is trying out some measures as well before trying to apply it to more countries, although that is merely guessing from my behalf.

webecedarian · 13 Dec 2014, 06:53 AM

The interesting fallout is that now that it finally dawned on people that the disease can travel, I suspect some pharmaceutical company is going to make a lot of money.

malcarada · 13 Dec 2014, 10:42 AM

Ebola is a huge problem in Europe, people from infected countries are supervised at the airport but you never know if any of the thousands of illegal African immigrants sneaking in daily are going to infect the population. The border is too porous to safely control these kind of infectious diseases. People might regret it one day not having put mines at the border.

15 Oct 2014, 10:58 AM	#1
webecedarian Essential Contributor Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 479	Non-American members: Ebola? As I'd said, I love that this is a fairly international forum - as a matter of fact, I don't even know where EMD is based, which would normally make me leery - since most of the forums I participate in are close to 100% American. And I realized that there are often questions I've been curious about, with not many opportunities to ask, so I should try here, especially since the Lounge tends to be rather languid. If you're not in the U.S. - how is your country reacting to the Ebola threat? Is it all over your news? Is it simply presented as news, or is there fear-mongering? It's one of the dominant stories in network television news, despite the fact that there are barely a few cases in a population of 300,000,000.

26 Oct 2014, 06:59 AM	#6
n5bb Intergalactic Postmaster Join Date: May 2004 Location: Irving, Texas Posts: 8,926	Ebola kills patients rather quickly and is hard to treat. Unfortunately, it's spreading very rapidly and is overloading the medical care systems of some western Africa countries. There are only a few locations in the US which offer the high level of isolation which appears to be needed to keep medical staff safe (as we saw with the two nurses in Dallas, who are now Ebola-free after extensive treatment). The major issue is the rapid growth of a disease with a mortality risk of about 50%: http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/20...rhaps-spreads/ So far, Ebola is only a problem in a few western Africa countries (and to a much lesser extent the Democratic Republic of the Congo in central Africa, which has an unrelated outbreak of a different Ebola strain). See: http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/notices Dallas County (which is mostly the City of Dallas, Texas) had 4 deaths of West Nile related virus in 2006, and 2 deaths in 2013. West Nile is a mosquito borne virus. Bill Last edited by n5bb : 26 Oct 2014 at 07:07 AM. Reason: added West Nile Virus comments

15 Oct 2014, 11:40 AM	#2
n5bb Intergalactic Postmaster Join Date: May 2004 Location: Irving, Texas Posts: 8,926	I'm in the Dallas TX area (not outside the US). But since the only Ebola cases in North America during this latest outbreak developed 13 miles from my house, I thought I might comment. Since 48 persons in contact with the original patient from Africa (who unfortunately died a few days ago) are still being monitored, and 76 hospital workers are being monitored, it's a major issue here. One nurse so far is known to have caught Ebola from the patient. Ebola is in the news because it seems to spread very easily to those who have contact with the body (or bodily fluids) of an infected person expressing symptoms. A nurse who was treating the Liberian man in the Dallas hospital came down with the disease (even though she was taking normal safety precautions), and fortunately she now seems to be recovering. Many medical workers in western Africa have died due to Ebola, and this threat to the medical staffs is causing great concern. The healthcare systems in some African countries are in danger of complete collapse due to Ebola at this time. The other dangerous issue with regards to Ebola is that no symptoms are expressed for several days after the disease is contracted. So the man who flew from western Africa to Dallas with Ebola had no symptoms during the flight and for some time afterward. This means that this dangerous disease can spread rapidly to remote locations very rapidly, since the carriers don't know they carry the disease and so may travel on aircraft to any part of the world. Bill

18 Oct 2014, 11:01 PM	#3
Tsunami The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: in between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown Posts: 2,341	There is concern in Europe, but not true panic as yet. It is a big issue in Spain though, as a nurse has been infected there without having been in Africa, she got the virus from treating a patient with the virus who had just returned from Africa. Since that event, 1 or 2 more cases occured in Spain, and the spouses and closest friends of those infected had to be quarantained temporarily too. Outside of Spain, panic seems to not be concrete yet, concern however is here. Some flights to affected African countries have been cancelled, and medical staff have been given special suits and training on how to deal with ebola patients should one of them end up in Belgium. So we're in the stage of not causing panic, but preparing just in case we'd be confrontated with an ebola patient. A somewhat odd thing is how the disease even penetrated into worlds that have nothing to do with medical cases. Some football (soccer) clubs had African players who had to fly to Africa and back to represent their national team. Even while none of them had to play in a dangerous area of the continent, some clubs did do a checkup upon the return of the players. Our new (we have new government since exactly a week ago) minister of Healthcare, has stated there is no need for special rules for now, since there has not been any ebola case in the country as yet and panic is unnecessary (she says). I guess those emergency plans are well thought of just in case we'd see an infected person on Belgian soil, but for now they try to keep people calm and tell them not to worry. Travel to West Africa is disencouraged though.

23 Oct 2014, 11:47 AM	#4
webecedarian Essential Contributor Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 479	Yes, but, Tsunami, where are you? I mean, apart from "in between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown." Belgium? I've heard that about the athletes, and some students (from uninfected African countries!) have even been turned away. Interesting Bill/n5bb, that you're able to chime in from Dallas. But, if you don't mind my saying so, the main reason it's in the news, it seems to me, is that it's typical network fear-mongering, and even more so locally. Like the first West Nile panic in New York, although hardly any cases developed. But it's so frightening and dramatic, it grabs headlines, like murders. What struck me so far is that of the very few cases in America, there seems to be a much better recovery rate. As a matter of fact, it's even been clamped down on successfully in some African countries. Yes, of course it's frighteningly contagious under certain conditions, but maybe just good medical infrastructure would dramatically lower the mortality rate?

26 Oct 2014, 05:12 AM	#5
Gankaku Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Virginia, USA Posts: 3,265	You know, I was just thinking...I know Ebola is scary and all...why aren't people as scared of malaria and dengue fever? They are extremely easy to catch (via mosquito rather than bodily fluids), are both killer diseases as well, and more people get those diseases every year than ebola. There are no known cures for either malaria or dengue, other than management of fluid dehydration and to make the person comfortable. I suppose Ebola causes more terrible suffering? I don't know. Thoughts?

26 Oct 2014, 08:24 AM	#7
Gankaku Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Virginia, USA Posts: 3,265	I guess the mortality rate is less with dengue and malaria since it's about 50% with ebola. However, 12,500 die yearly from dengue and in 2012 alone malaria killed nearly 800,000.

27 Oct 2014, 05:37 AM	#8
beeboy Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 551	Canada here. I'm disappointed government did not monitor travellers closer at the get-go and apply restrictions and counter measures. Yes, perhaps human rights issues may have been ruffled but sometimes its for the greater good. Downplaying the seriousness of the disease by north american governments is not helpful.

21 Nov 2014, 12:26 AM	#10
Tsunami The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: in between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown Posts: 2,341	I am in Belgium indeed. We have so far no special arrangements to my knowledge, although some people coming directly from African countries affected by Ebola would be scanned or followed apparently. I am not sure of the exact details though. We haven't got any major new rules applying because of Ebola, maybe that will change if we'd have a concrete cause of Ebola within the borders of the country though...

21 Nov 2014, 11:18 PM	#12
Tsunami The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: in between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown Posts: 2,341	It could be true, although it seems to be a very new measure. But people have indicated some worries about passengers coming from Africa, so maybe the government is step by step beginning to get concerned. But if it's limited to only these countries, I'd say we're still quite flexible ; other countries have shown greater worries before. I guess the government is trying out some measures as well before trying to apply it to more countries, although that is merely guessing from my behalf.

13 Dec 2014, 06:53 AM	#13
webecedarian Essential Contributor Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 479	The interesting fallout is that now that it finally dawned on people that the disease can travel, I suspect some pharmaceutical company is going to make a lot of money.

13 Dec 2014, 10:42 AM	#14
malcarada Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: European Union Posts: 184	Ebola is a huge problem in Europe, people from infected countries are supervised at the airport but you never know if any of the thousands of illegal African immigrants sneaking in daily are going to infect the population. The border is too porous to safely control these kind of infectious diseases. People might regret it one day not having put mines at the border.