strong enough to walk has to be good news. let’s keep in mind that one reason the death rate for ebola is so high is that a lot of the people getting it are not in great health to begin with - they frequently are malnourished and have malaria as well.
Agreed. I hope Ms. Writebol is doing equally well.
This goes a long way in defeating ignorance. Thank you Red Stilettos. Are you reading this aceplace57 ?
Agree with SpazCat’s point though.
If I were in Brantly’s shoes, while I wouldn’t expect to be simply left to die, I wouldn’t expect to be on the first flight to Atlanta either.
I’d consider it a reasonable precaution to be treated at a facility far away from a population center, maybe not in the continental US.
And if such facilities don’t exist, it seems a bit of an oversight. Even if ebola is easily-contained, what if tomorrow there’s an outbreak of a new mystery disease, dubbed “Super-Infectious Deadly Disease”, and one of the first victims is an american expat living in a country with lousy medical care…
Fly him over to the same facility?
I’m honestly curious at how many people in this thread think the CDC (based outside of Atlanta) wouldn’t have proper procedures and facilities to account for this very concern. I certainly don’t know the ins and outs of the place, but I’m willing to give them an extremely cursory benefit of the doubt that they do. In fact, I’m willing to bet that one of the very first things they asked themselves when building the Center for Disease Control and Prevention is “what if someone has a really contagious disease we need to study and treat?”
What nobody seems to be saying in this thread (unless I’ve missed something) is the cold hard fact:
Do you want two people with hands-on knowledge of the disease to die, and for their wisdom or lack thereof to be lost forever?
I have concerns about the doctors being brought back here, and I certainly hope that the CDC doesn’t have to use the lowest bidder for their gloves and suits.
Again, this is what these facilities at Emory and 3 other locations around the country were built for. People will not be taken to CDC proper (right next door to Emory) because CDC doesn’t have the infrastructure for clinical support. But CDC will most certainly be involved in the care of these individuals as they have hands on experience with ebola in other countries.
I explained why this won’t work in post 52. An off-shore or remote site would be more dangerous for both the patients and the staff caring for them.
WHO is issuing a more grim warning than the CDC.
Just read where the plane touched down in Bangor.* Funny how I felt this… instinctual twinge.
Bangor is also where, just after 9/11, any suspect plane heading for the US would be stopped and cleared. Had the same reaction then.
- “Bangor?! I hardly know her!” (As a resident of Maine, I am legally obligated to make that joke whenever Bangor is mentioned, regardless of context.)
That’s because WHO is thinking globally, while the CDC is primarily concerned with the impact on the US. This is a devastating, worrying, terrible outbreak. But not really for Americans.
Well, I’ve been thoroughly convinced that the CDC is making the right call here. For some reason, I was under the impression Ebola was more easily spread than it actually is - unless the medical workers decide to start smearing the hospital walls with blood and feces, I doubt we’re in for much of a pandemic. Combine this with the fact that an Ebola carrier would likely have traveled here at some point anyway due to the incubation time, and that the doctors with Doctors Without Borders are truly some of the best among us, I don’t think there’s much of an argument against it.
Of course, the situation in Africa is far more serious. The fear of the medical assistance that’s spreading is really, really bad, and very difficult to fight.
Thanks, even sven and Red Stilettos, a commendable job of getting the right word out.
Apologies if it was mentioned, I didn’t see it but once a person contracts and survives an Ebola infection, how does that affect their future propensity to re-contract the disease? The reason I ask, I could see Dr. Brantley, once recovered, going back to an infection zone to help treat victims sometime in the future. Would he be impervious to the virus or just as prone as anyone else that never had it?
This is making me wonder if one reason why these two came back to the US is so the CDC can get a sample of the virus to see how it’s changing. Not conspiracy-theory-thinking here, just a speculation. It’s easier to get a viable virus from a nearby source than to have it shipped from halfway around the world.
What makes you think the CDC (and other labs) don’t already have a sample?
There are a few labs in the US (and elsewhere) that do or have done studies with Ebola (various strains) and similar viruses (using primates or other animal models).
If they’ve gone so far as to know what strain of the virus it is, either they already have it (current virus) in stock somewhere, or they have previous stocks from that strain.
Granted, there are some things that the CDC may want that they can get with the patients here rather than elsewhere (fresh tissue samples, fresh body fluid samples, fresh autopsy samples if it gets to that).
That fact may not be known at this time.
One reason for bringing those two to Atlanta is to study the active infection and, if they survive, the aftereffects at some of the most advanced, state-of-the-art facilities in the world.
If they’ve identified the virus as Z. ebola then they already have a sample of some sort. Again, one of the justifications for this transport is to study the virus in vivo in a way that hasn’t been done before. This will likely help not only these two (we certainly hope it will) but may also benefit future victims wherever they may be in the world.
The virus responsible for this outbreak has already been isolated and fully sequenced. The sequence is published in New England Journal of Medicine (I’d link to it, but I’m on my phone.) It’s 97% identical to previous Ebola Zaire isolates. There is the possiblity of continued evolution throughout the outbreak, but it is expected to be limited. Ebola isn’t known for having a rapid evolution like HIV.
Look, I have every faith in the CDC (despite their several recent lapses). What I’m saying is that I’m surprised there aren’t remote centers for treating patients with potentially dangerous diseases.
Ebola…yeah it does seem it can be contained no problem given US standards of hygiene and medical care. But the next time, if there’s a disease where it is transmitted by airborne particles, or even some unknown mechanism?
I’d just like to thank you for being such a bold warrior in the battle against ignorance here.
Here it is: Emergence of Zaire Ebola Virus Disease in Guinea — Preliminary Report
The fully sequenced the virus from samples taken from three different patients (they had samples from 20 patients in total). All three sequenced samples were 18,959 nucleotides long. They found 6 points at which the sequence varied among the samples, of which 2 were non-synonomous (meaning the mutations affected the protein sequence).
Based upon the mutation rate, researchers expect the current outbreak began with a single introduction of the virus into the human population in December 2013 or earlier.