Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Old Crow

(2,212 posts)
34. Are you asking if I believe the Corrected trend lines are inaccurate?
Sat Oct 4, 2014, 01:26 AM
Oct 2014

If so, no, I trust the epidemiologists who authored the model. They based their estimates of underreporting on the history of previous epidemics and math. I'm certainly not in a position to second-guess them.

You haven't asked, but to cut to the chase, here's my take on the situation.

1. The Ebola outbreak in West Africa is deadly serious and is going to result in shocking numbers of dead in the coming months. We haven't seen nothing yet in terms of the number of fatalities.

2. That said, provided the biology of the virus doesn't change, it is extremely unlikely that more than a dozen people within the U.S. will die of the disease. We have the CDC, thank God, and the resources to handle a highly deadly, but not very contagious, disease. Africa, alas, does not.

3. The frightening asterisk to this whole situation, which isn't discussed that often, is the possibility--remote, but possible--that the virus will mutate. Ebola is not very contagious now. If it mutates in just the right fashion, all bets are off. However remote the possibilities of a mutation are, every transmission of the disease from one individual to another provides the virus with more opportunity to make that lucky genetic leap that will allow it to find new hosts by a cough or sneeze. Since this is the largest outbreak of Ebola on record, the disease is being afforded more opportunities to mutate than ever before. Essentially, what is now going on in Africa is the creation---and illness, and often death--of thousands of human petri dishes. Soon, those human petri dishes will number in the tens of thousands and possibly hundreds of thousands. It is absolutely in the best interest of the United States that we do everything we can to extinguish this Ebola flare-up as quickly as possible.

4. Having said all of the above, Americans who are not working face-to-face with Ebola patients would make far better use of their time by scheduling a flu shot in the weeks ahead than by watching Fox News and worrying about a disease that poses far, far less a threat to them than a lightning strike, a car accident, or a bad case of the flu.

Hope that helps.

I can't tell you how contagious is, but I can tell you how serious it is. lonestarnot Oct 2014 #1
Eh... BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #2
I know you want it to be more contagious, but morningfog Oct 2014 #3
I don't BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #4
Yes the article said all of that. You suggested the morningfog Oct 2014 #6
Sheesh. Over the top much? Old Crow Oct 2014 #12
Context BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #13
Understood. Old Crow Oct 2014 #16
Oh bullshit. Link to it or shut up. morningfog Oct 2014 #17
Drama. Feral Child Oct 2014 #39
Here is an interesting article "can you catch ebola from an infected blanket?" uppityperson Oct 2014 #5
Good info. morningfog Oct 2014 #7
Thank you. I found it in another thread. uppityperson Oct 2014 #8
THIS is the ANSWER. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ No more media hysteria, shall we? Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #41
And that is determined by a variety of factors. longship Oct 2014 #9
And really all the unhinged people need to do is look at morningfog Oct 2014 #11
I fully expect to see the same idiocy from the denialists/antivaxer/antiscience/ kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #32
I have a question gvstn Oct 2014 #10
Don't worry, Ebola is not contagious,. Zorra Oct 2014 #14
Furthermore BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #15
Thank you. 840high Oct 2014 #19
Link? Thank you. uppityperson Oct 2014 #21
Alright BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #23
You are misstating the information on the CDC website. Old Crow Oct 2014 #25
I don't mean to imply it was intentional or otherwise some shocking secret BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #27
How about an "Oh, you're right--I missed that"? Old Crow Oct 2014 #29
I mean BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #30
Are you asking if I believe the Corrected trend lines are inaccurate? Old Crow Oct 2014 #34
The curve for Uganda, Nigeria and Senegal has flatlined to 0.Ebola controlled. Why do you want to be Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #42
Are you addressing me? Or someone else? Old Crow Oct 2014 #43
Meant for blindtireass. Sorry. Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #44
That is a very interesting link, thank you. I do not see R0 numbers there though uppityperson Oct 2014 #28
I'll try and find better data BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #35
We do not commonly walk barefoot across sharp stones in a common latrine area alphafemale Oct 2014 #18
sigh BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #20
Have you gotten your flu vaccine yet? uppityperson Oct 2014 #22
This week, actually BlindTiresias Oct 2014 #24
That is good, so did I. uppityperson Oct 2014 #26
No case from sweat has yet been documented. Warpy Oct 2014 #33
Not likely. morningfog Oct 2014 #36
R0 is not the only factor. There is no way to quantify kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #31
MY question: EXACTLY HOW did those cured US victims contract it? We've never been told. WinkyDink Oct 2014 #37
They were working in the trenches, so to speak. morningfog Oct 2014 #40
"I guess the question is do they know how they were infected." And that is what scares: Do THEY WinkyDink Oct 2014 #46
The real question Feral Child Oct 2014 #38
"on average" does not take into consideration individual circumstances magical thyme Oct 2014 #45
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No, Seriously, How Contag...»Reply #34