Man Tested For Ebola In Birmingham As Fears Grow That Virus Could Spread Across Continents

First topic message reminder :

[ltr]The British government views Ebola as a "very serious threat", Philip Hammond said today, as it emerged that man has been tested at a hospital in Birmingham suspected of carrying the deadly virus into the UK, after travelling from Nigeria via Paris.[/ltr]
[ltr]The unidentified man has since tested negative for the virus, the Daily Mail reported, but health professionals are being urged to keep vigilant for signs of the deadly ebola virus amid fears that it could spread to the UK.[/ltr]
[ltr]Another man visited Charing Cross Hospital in west London over fears he had the virus, but doctors ruled out the need for an Ebola test.[/ltr]
[ltr]Public Health England has briefed border officials and airport staff on the symptoms and issued an urgent warning to doctors after an infected man was able to make multiple flights from Liberia to Nigeria, where he died.[/ltr]

[ltr]http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/30/ebola-birmingham-virus_n_5632718.html?utm_hp_ref=uk[/ltr]

victorisnotamused wrote:

Original Quill wrote:One of the nice things about extremely deadly microbes is they kill the host before they have time to spread.

However, I understand ebola has a 2-3 week incubation period.

during which time the victim is NOT infectious.....

Really? That's good.

victorisnotamused wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:
Not quite, we can impose restrictions on anybody traveling to or from the affected areas.
And refuse anybody traveling here from elsewhere who may have been in affected areas too.
This would protect the national security of this country and the health of UK citizens which is our govts prime purpose.
This is a disease that could easily be prevented from arriving here, and which could spread rapidly through our densely populated areas.

Take a deep breath,,,,,,now.......
it is unlikely in the exteme, unless it mutates to become airborne, to "spread rapidly" over any great area......

"...Ebola viruses are highly infectious as well as contagious. Governments and individuals often quickly respond to quarantine the area while the lack of roads and transportation in many parts of Africa helps to contain the outbreak.[62] Airline crews are trained to spot the symptoms of Ebola in passengers flying from places where the virus is found. Crews are told to quarantine anyone who looks infected.[68]
As an outbreak of ebola progresses, bodily fluids from diarrhea, vomiting, and bleeding represent a hazard. Due to lack of proper equipment and hygienic practices, large-scale epidemics occur mostly in poor, isolated areas without modern hospitals or well-educated medical staff. Many areas where the infectious reservoir exists have just these characteristics. In such environments all that can be done is to immediately cease all needle-sharing or use without adequate sterilization procedures, isolate patients, and observe strict barrier nursing procedures with the use of a medical-rated disposable face mask, gloves, goggles, and a gown at all times, strictly enforced for all medical personnel and visitors.[69] The aim of all of these techniques is to avoid any person’s contact with the blood or secretions of any patient, including those who are deceased.[70]...."

"...Given the lethal nature of Ebola, and since no approved vaccine or treatment is available, it is classified as a biosafety level 4 agent, as well as a Category A bioterrorism agent by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention...."

"...Ebola viruses are World Health Organization Risk Group 4 Pathogens, requiring Biosafety Level 4-equivalent containment. Laboratory researchers have to be properly trained in BSL-4 practices and wear proper personal protective equipment...."


"...The virus has been confirmed to be transmitted through body fluids.Transmission through oral exposure and through conjunctiva exposure is likely[23] and has been confirmed in non-human primates.[24] Filoviruses are not naturally transmitted by aerosol. They are, however, highly infectious as breathable 0.8–1.2 micrometre droplets in laboratory conditions;[25] because of this potential route of infection, these viruses have been classified as Category A biological weapons.[26]..."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_disease

Tommy Monk wrote:

victorisnotamused wrote:
Take a deep breath,,,,,,now.......
it is unlikely in the exteme, unless it mutates to become airborne, to "spread rapidly" over any great area......

"...Ebola viruses are highly infectious as well as contagious. Governments and individuals often quickly respond to quarantine the area while the lack of roads and transportation in many parts of Africa helps to contain the outbreak.[62] Airline crews are trained to spot the symptoms of Ebola in passengers flying from places where the virus is found. Crews are told to quarantine anyone who looks infected.[68]
As an outbreak of ebola progresses, bodily fluids from diarrhea, vomiting, and bleeding represent a hazard. Due to lack of proper equipment and hygienic practices, large-scale epidemics occur mostly in poor, isolated areas without modern hospitals or well-educated medical staff. Many areas where the infectious reservoir exists have just these characteristics. In such environments all that can be done is to immediately cease all needle-sharing or use without adequate sterilization procedures, isolate patients, and observe strict barrier nursing procedures with the use of a medical-rated disposable face mask, gloves, goggles, and a gown at all times, strictly enforced for all medical personnel and visitors.[69] The aim of all of these techniques is to avoid any person’s contact with the blood or secretions of any patient, including those who are deceased.[70]...."

"...Given the lethal nature of Ebola, and since no approved vaccine or treatment is available, it is classified as a biosafety level 4 agent, as well as a Category A bioterrorism agent by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention...."

"...Ebola viruses are World Health Organization Risk Group 4 Pathogens, requiring Biosafety Level 4-equivalent containment. Laboratory researchers have to be properly trained in BSL-4 practices and wear proper personal protective equipment...."


"...The virus has been confirmed to be transmitted through body fluids.Transmission through oral exposure and through conjunctiva exposure is likely[23] and has been confirmed in non-human primates.[24] Filoviruses are not naturally transmitted by aerosol. They are, however, highly infectious as breathable 0.8–1.2 micrometre droplets in laboratory conditions;[25] because of this potential route of infection, these viruses have been classified as Category A biological weapons.[26]..."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_disease

yup all true.....but it doesnt make it as bad as flu for spreading...and a damn good job to....

dont panic tommy...it aint gonna come and get you ...unless you are into "hug a stiff"

If this can be transmitted by sneezing or coughing which is suggested above then it could be extremely dangerous.


And flu like symptoms are caused by ebola which means coughing and sneezing....



We have all seen how quickly these noro-viruses infect everyone in a school or cruise ship or restaurant etc...

All it could take is one person coughing and sneezing their way around London to infect hundreds even thousands, and then they could be infecting hundreds or even thousands each themselves thinking they just have a bit of flu.....


Stopping the arrival of this here should be prioritm and that means stopping people flying/travelling here who have been in affected areas.

totally different thing tommy

also those droplets mentioned dont last long either... at .8 to 1.2 micron they dry very quickly

noro virus is spread by in the main bad hygiene wash your hands....

also noro virus can penetrate undamaged skin....

the mechanisms are far different

I aint going to panic...

I worked as a microbiologist for a number of years, You can panic when I do.......

All it could take is one person coughing and sneezing their way around London to infect hundreds even thousands, and then they could be infecting hundreds or even thousands each themselves thinking they justhave a bit of flu.....
Stopping the arrival of this here should be priority and that means stopping people flying/travelling here who have been in affected areas.

Tommy Monk wrote:All it could take is one person coughing and sneezing their way around London to infect hundreds even thousands, and then they could be infecting hundreds or even thousands each themselves thinking they just have a bit of flu.....


Stopping the arrival of this here should be prioritm and that means stopping people flying/travelling here who have been in affected areas.

thats just silly panic tommy...It dont work like that

firstly only those actually showing symptoms are infectious.....those who have it but are still incubating it are NOT infectious...

Victor, you have just said how noroviruses are spread, which ARE spread very easily, and ebola can be spread in exactly the same way!?

Tommy Monk wrote:Victor, you have just said how noroviruses are spread, which ARE spread very easily, and ebola can be spread in exactly the same way!?

yes but the two viruses are different...noro virus is far more infectious, it is a "stronger" virus in that it can live outside the body much longer and IS ADAPTED to that means od spread..

ebola is weaker, and ill adapted to spread by droplet infection. such a route of infection is so unlikely that you mnay discount it...Ebola is spread by CLOSE contact with a person who is actually sick with it...and if they are sick with it they aint going far....

But you can be sick with it and contagious and still only suffering flu like symptoms and a bit of sickness and diarrhea, so still very active and mobile and potentially spreading it through similar ways as a norovirus...???

Tommy Monk wrote:But you can be sick with it and contagious and still only suffering flu like symptoms and a bit of sickness and diarrhea, so still very active and mobile and potentially spreading it through similar ways as a norovirus...???

nope.....It doesnt work like that....

the "potential" to spread like noro virus is very very low...If that wasnt the case there would have been 10's of thousands dead in africa already, instead of only about 1000 across 3 countries

But totally different demographics at play too isn't there?


Many cases in relatively sparsely populated small villages/areas in Africa.



Surely if brought into densely populated London, the potential for infections and spread would be enormous and a logistical nightmare to trace contacts and possible new infections???

well lets wait and see what happens itn the two big cities that now have it .....

" after the deadly tropical virus spread to two of west Africa's largest cities.

Liberia, along with neighbouring Guinea and Sierra Leone, is struggling to contain an epidemic that has infected some 1,200 people and left at least 670 dead across the region since the start of the year.

Last week authorities in Sierra Leone's capital Freetown and Lagos in Nigeria announced their first cases, marking an alarming new front in the fight against a disease mainly confined to remote villages and rural outposts.

Victor, I'm slightly confused by your present position on this being quite relaxed about potential spread with your apparent 'wait and see' approach, as your first post on this thread showed a distinct voicing of concern....

You said...


"Yes it is possible to contain it...In a civilised country...

it is ONLY spread by physical contact and contact with body fluids...

first thing should be a ban on incomming foreign national passengers whether by ship or plance from any likely infected area....and any of our own nationals returning should be subject to 3 weeks quarrantine and observation...."



The fact that it is now in Lagos which has considerable numbers of people from there travelling here is surely a major concern.



One infected person in Lagos could pass it on to hundreds if not thousands of people who could then pass it on to hundreds if not thousands more quite quickly, and who wouldn't even know they were infected for some time.


It this time each of those could again pass it on to hundreds or thousands more....



How many of these could arrive in London and elsewhere starting other outbreaks???



One could infect many, who in turn could each infect many more and so on....




Surely the answer is to stop any inward travel from any affected areas immediately as you first suggested...???



Why have you had a change of position on this...???

TM, I might be American but that sure looked like sarcasm to me ...

No sarcasm just genuine question.

Deadly virus Ebola is spreading faster than efforts to control it, the head of the World Health Organisation (WHO) has warned.
The comments came amid news that the recent outbreak of the disease has killed more than 700 people in West Africa.
Dr Margaret Chan, director-general of the WHO, issues the warning as president from the affected countries met today in Guinea’s capital Conakry.
Dr Chan, director-general of the WHO, said the meeting in Conakry "must be a turning point" in the battle against Ebola, which is now affecting people in three African capitals for the first time in history.
"If the situation continues to deteriorate, the consequences can be catastrophic in terms of lost lives but also severe socio-economic disruption and a high risk of spread to other countries," she said.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/ebola-epidemic-spreading-faster-than-we-can-contain-it-warns-head-of-world-health-organisation-9643836.html



I also read somewhere that there are 4 main strains of ebola and this is the worst one....

you are right..it si the worst one....

however...whilst I would endorse a travel ban, It should also be kept in mind that

we are far better plced to control such a virus
we have better health provision
AND more importantly we are in general healthier, and better fed than most africans

Now Tommy, I think we can agree it has the potential to be a serious problem, whether or not it actually would BE a serious problem here is debateable..

I dont see a scenario of 10,s of thousands infected....for 2 reasons....one its not that "kind" of virus, it lacks somewhat in its ability to propagate itself independant of CLOSE contact....
two, our health sevices, our citizens and our way of life are much different

we tend to have better hygiene, we are better fed, we dont have the funery practices

an ebola case dieing in hospital would be bagged up and cremated in double quick time, never mind any niceties, and our citizens would not kick off about that as they will undersatnd the reasons and need....

If it gets here i predict only AT WORST 100-200 deaths

Now I could be wrong of course, nothing is cast in stone with a bug like this
It is whats known as a "primitive" virus and as such could be subject to some surprising mutations which may either ease the situation or make it a whole lot worse...

AT the MOMENT...I would rate it about 9/10 (with 10 being the least) as a threat to the UK...

If it was brought here by ONE person I would rate it (all else staying the same) as 8/10

if it was brought here by multiple carriers the threat increases

If it mutates to become airborne or increases its infectivity then the threat is a 1/10

we can only wait and see

from the article you quoted Tommy...pretty much says what I am saying

"Dr Chan emphasised today that the general public "is not at high risk of infection", but also said the Ebola virus should not be allowed to circulate widely.

"Constant mutation and adaptation are the survival mechanisms of viruses and other microbes," she said. "We must not give this virus opportunities to deliver more surprises."

Prevention is The key, stopping it getting here in the first place is easy by imposing travel restrictions.


Why take any chances?


You say we have better hygiene practices, which is definately true overall but not everybody does practice this, and proved by the quick and easy spread of noroviruses which ebola can be transferred just as easy in similar fashion.




We have limited places available in hospitals to contain and treat people in isolation facilities which could be filled within days if required, then what?



This has the potential of being very bad indeed if arrives here.... surely the best and easiest course of action is to do all that is necessary to prevent the arrival rather than try to deal with it after its arrival...?




You mention possible mutations, and also what about the possible extra risks involved in that we may have a much less resistance to this type of virus because of lack of any previous exposure and that many people here already have generally quite weak immune systems ?



In my view it would be much easier to try to guarantee the non arrival of this virus through stricter travel controls.



Failing to do this is almost inviting trouble.



I don't think we should allow this possibility....