What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Ebola - all or nothing?

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Issa, Christie, and Cuomo are all full of **** in varying degrees. Maybe if they would ask the experts from MSF rather than the experts who sell fishrags and clicks they would have an opinion actually based in science rather than loonbattery.

The only thing worse than someone riding public transportation with Ebola is driving these people underground. How in the hell do you contact trace when you don't know who has been in contact with them? The scariest thing I can possibly imagine is finding someone dead of Ebola in the subway.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

unofan said:
Sure. The bug couldn't live long enough to make it through a standard 60-day closing anyway, let alone after the thorough bleach cleaning that would be done after someone was diagnosed.
Click to expand...

I really think a house for sale with a known ebola infected person having lived in it (or having died in it) would have a harder time selling than most, or at least until some straight facts get presented to the mass population of the US. Even then all the paranoid conspiracy people would not buy it. I'm not sure I'd be able to go back into my house if that happened. I guess it would come down to the facts of the bug, which are still a little grey and not black and white at this time.

On a humorous note, a co-worker of mine who is a conspiracy nut, thinks's Omaba is allowing this to get spread into the country to destroy our economy, and therefore our government, so a Marxist revolution can occur.
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Timothy A said:
I guess it would come down to the facts of the bug, which are still a little grey and not black and white at this time.

On a humorous note, a co-worker of mine who is a conspiracy nut, thinks's Omaba is allowing this to get spread into the country to destroy our economy, and therefore our government, so a Marxist revolution can occur.
Click to expand...


Which facts on the bug are grey at this point?

And sure it's a co-worker... ;):p:D
 
Last edited:
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ebola-three-reasons-most-us-patients-survived/


""There's no magic going on. The supportive care in the U.S. is just incredibly different," Dr. Bruce Farber, chief of infectious diseases at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y., and Long Island Jewish Medical Center in New Hyde Park, N.Y. told CBS News."

"U.S. hospitals are used to providing basic supportive care, including providing intravenous fluids and nutrients and maintaining blood pressure. Farber explains that a person with Ebola loses a lot of fluids. A patient experiencing Ebola symptoms such as extreme diarrhea and vomiting can rapidly become dehydrated and needs about 300ccs, the equivalent of one soda can, of intravenous fluids every hour to sustain their organ systems."
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Gurtholfin said:
Which facts on the bug are grey at this point?
Click to expand...

How is it evolving and adapting as it is transmitted from person to person?

It was amazing to read in the New Yorker article how they could actually track the transmission of the virus from person to person. Eventually what started as an infection from one person split into two different strains.

Anyone who invokes "science" at this point has to include the qualifiers, "based on what we know now." This kind of virus replicates so quickly and in such large numbers that ongoing mutations are inevitable. We want to get it under control while those mutations are still minor and insignificant.
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Candide said:
The best thing about science is in the long run, and even the not so long run, you can't BS it. The pols can and will, forever, but the scientific method is a beautiful thing -- if you're pulling it out of your arse, you're nailed to the wall the instant you submit to peer review.
Click to expand...

Not sure if you are willfully blind or just incredibly naïve.

This one was caught and corrected. There are others just as troubling. "Science" is a human endeavor, and like all human endeavors, it is subject to the limitations and frailties of its practitioners.

SAGE Publishers is retracting 60 articles from the Journal of Vibration and Control after an investigation revealed a “peer review and citation ring” involving a professor in Taiwan.
Click to expand...




This article indicates that the JVC situation is not unique.


At least four scientists have been cheating the peer review system in a whole new way: when submitting a paper to a scientific journal, they suggest reviewers with email addresses that track back to themselves; then they write a glowing review. So far, the ploy has succeeded in getting work published in Experimental Parasitology, Pharmaceutical Biology, and several other journals, including two in journals under the umbrella of publishing giant Elsevier, The Chronicle of Higher Education reported this week (September 30).

...

One such case was identified by Claudiu Supuran, editor in chief of the Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and Medicinal Chemistry
Click to expand...



That's at least six different journals with problematic "peer review" situations. Sure, they eventually got found out, in these cases, but you said "you can't BS it, you're nailed to the wall the instant you submit to peer review." Maybe not. How many other situations are lurking out there just like these that haven't been uncovered yet?
 
Last edited:
FreshFish said:
How is it evolving and adapting as it is transmitted from person to person?

It was amazing to read in the New Yorker article how they could actually track the transmission of the virus from person to person. Eventually what started as an infection from one person split into two different strains.

Anyone who invokes "science" at this point has to include the qualifiers, "based on what we know now." This kind of virus replicates so quickly and in such large numbers that ongoing mutations are inevitable. We want to get it under control while those mutations are still minor and insignificant.
Click to expand...

Scare mongering by repeatedly saying "mutation" as much as possible and claiming the governors know more than actual scientists is just sad.

The New England Journal of Medicine frowns on your shenanigans.
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Gurtholfin said:
There are lots of hospitals in the US that can do all of these things and would if a pandemic broke out here.

The difference is that our hospitals would do it better.
Click to expand...


Looks like some hospitals in Wisconsin feel like they could handle ebola cases:

http://www.channel3000.com/health/uw-hospital-included-in-ebola-transfer-plan/29383270


"State Health Officer Karen McKeown says all four facilities have plans in place to safely treat Ebola patients and prevent the disease's spread."
 
Last edited:
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

unofan said:
Scare mongering by repeatedly saying "mutation" as much as possible and claiming the governors know more than actual scientists is just sad.

The New England Journal of Medicine frowns on your shenanigans.
Click to expand...

It's very easy to take the true statement "all science is provisional" and turn it into "we know nothing for certain." Yes, as a reductio absurdum, it is true. By the same token, there is no reason why the atoms that make up the Koch Brothers' gold reserves can't spontaneously recompose themselves in my den. I'm just not going to make my plans with the assumption that they will.

The fear-mongering is disgusting, but as we can see it's effective. Few people have the time or skill to research everything themselves, assign probabilities, calculate logical dependencies, and figure out whether it's safe to leave the house in the morning. So really we are all taking somebody's word for it. The choices are the medical research community or Louie Gohmert. Certain types of people will choose to trust one over the other, based on autobiographical details.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Kepler said:
It's very easy to take the true statement "all science is provisional" and turn it into "we know nothing for certain." Yes, as a reductio absurdum, it is true. By the same token, there is no reason why the atoms that make up the Koch Brothers' gold reserves can't spontaneously recompose themselves in my den. I'm just not going to make my plans with the assumption that they will.
Click to expand...

I must spread rep. After I'm done laughing.
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Kepler said:
It's very easy to take the true statement "all science is provisional" and turn it into "we know nothing for certain." Yes, as a reductio absurdum, it is true. By the same token, there is no reason why the atoms that make up the Koch Brothers' gold reserves can't spontaneously recompose themselves in my den. I'm just not going to make my plans with the assumption that they will.

The fear-mongering is disgusting, but as we can see it's effective. Few people have the time or skill to research everything themselves, assign probabilities, calculate logical dependencies, and figure out whether it's safe to leave the house in the morning. So really we are all taking somebody's word for it. The choices are the medical research community or Louie Gohmert. Certain types of people will choose to trust one over the other, based on autobiographical details.
Click to expand...

very well said. exactly right.
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Gurtholfin said:
Which facts on the bug are grey at this point?

And sure it's a co-worker... ;):p:D
Click to expand...

Grey...how it's spread....

Co-worker....LOL moment in a overly work infested day......dang, you saw right through that thin veil. ;)

What I believe is that Hillary wants it spread into the country so any potential Republican opponent she can smear either way..."you over-reacted" or "you didn't do enough", while she just sits on the sidelines with a big grin on her face right now. In my world, it always comes back to a Clinton. :O
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

FreshFish said:
How is it evolving and adapting as it is transmitted from person to person?

It was amazing to read in the New Yorker article how they could actually track the transmission of the virus from person to person. Eventually what started as an infection from one person split into two different strains.
Click to expand...

You realize in theory, you could track the transmission of most viruses from person to person based on background nucleotide changes, right? (I can think of a few rare circumstances that would make it tricky off the top of my head that have no relevance to ebola). Nearly every replicating set of DNA (that means people, bacteria, virus, etc) has non-essential areas of nucleotides that mutate at predictable rates. The reason we do not do it is several reasons including utility, funding, public interest, etc. I have seen it done in the literature for several viruses, mostly puzzling HIV outbreaks. We could (and do with mitochondrial DNA) track maternal lineages like this in humans. It is just a lot easier in something with a much higher replication rate.

Additionally, since we do not have any good treatments for it we also are not putting significant selective pressure. That means were are not selecting strains for virulence or resistance.

Of the 10+ infectious disease docs I have chatted with since this blew up into a hyperbole storm, zero have expressed concern about Ebola changing significantly. Of all the docs of all stripes I have chatted with since, I have not met one that does not feel comfortable with interacting or themselves treating a patient with Ebola. Any hospital worth its weight should have bloodborne precautions in place.

FreshFish said:
Anyone who invokes "science" at this point has to include the qualifiers, "based on what we know now." This kind of virus replicates so quickly and in such large numbers that ongoing mutations are inevitable. We want to get it under control while those mutations are still minor and insignificant.
Click to expand...

There is so much off in this I do not know where to comment. I would suggest you do not utter any of this ever again.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Christie is tired of talking about the quarantine just as much as he's tired about talking a raise in the minimum wage.
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

FreshFish said:
This kind of virus replicates so quickly and in such large numbers that ongoing mutations are inevitable. We want to get it under control while those mutations are still minor and insignificant.
Click to expand...

A technical note: in evolutionary genetics, the term "mutation" refers to any change in the genetic code, no matter how trivial. Much of the time, mutations can't even be noticed without using a gene sequencer.

It's possible that a dyspeptic crank who is more familiar with the X-Men than with an x-ray diffraction microscope might try to quibble over the technical use of that word in a technical context, but if you are like me, you'll just ignore his pathetic petty whining.


There is a very significant difference between irrational fear and prudent caution.

So far, it seems that the CDC has been more concerned with "reassuring the public" than it has been with preparations to control the spread of the virus. After all, it's been raging in Africa since the spring. You'd think that if they were on the ball, they'd have been well prepared for its potential appearance in the US long before now. Yet their initial response was not exactly assured and confident. It's hard to see how putting a political "fixer" with no background in medicine or epidemiology in charge addresses that consideration.

It seems like we need a "Goldilocks" here. The CDC response has been too little, and Gov Christie's response seems a bit too much.


As I had said much earlier in this thread, I have more confidence in state and local response than the CDC. So far, that's how it seems to be playing out. I hope it stays that way.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Gurtholfin said:
My understanding is that it's spread by coming into contact with a patient's bodily fluids who is currently showing symptoms
Are there other documented ways that this has been passed?
Here's what the cdc says: http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/transmission/index.html?s_cid=cs_3923
Click to expand...

Correct.

This dude writes in an approachable way IMO. As far as I know, it has only been shown to be transmissible by aerosol in laboratory conditions. He echos that sentiment.

http://www.virology.ws/2014/09/18/what-we-are-not-afraid-to-say-about-ebola-virus/

http://www.virology.ws/2014/09/27/transmission-of-ebola-virus/
 
Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Gurtholfin said:
My understanding is that it's spread by coming into contact with a patient's bodily fluids who is currently showing symptoms.
Click to expand...

WisconsinWildcard said:
As far as I know, it has only been shown to be transmissible by aerosol in laboratory conditions.
Click to expand...

From what I know and have heard and read, the most serious concern is not about how it spreads. Ironically, the concern is that it becomes less lethal. Because it currently kills people off so quickly, there is only a narrow window within which it can be transmitted from an infected person to others. If it evolves/mutates to be less deadly, then that window widens.

Prudent caution means basically don't become complacent. Don't believe that what we know now is all that needs to be known. No reason to "fear" just remain vigilant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top