What happens if the ebola outbreak from West Africa spreads in the West?

[Jango]

I watched this: [video]http://www.c-span.org/video/?321656-1/georgetown-university-ebola-conference[/video]

What happens if the Ebola virus spreads in the West? Like through Greece, Denmark, Poland, Italy, Spain, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. This outbreak is already the worst on record. President Obama, the U.N. General Secretary, the U.N. Security Council, the C.D.C., and the World Health Organization have all sounded the alarm about the Ebola virus.

The virus is outpacing the global response, the mortality rate is over 70%, and is spread through bodily fluids.

So what happens if Ebola spreads into the West?

1) Less than 100 dead, minimal government intervention
2) More than 100 dead, moderate government intervention
3) More than 1,000 dead, large government intervention
4) More than 1,000,000 dead, extreme government intervention

 

[blarg]

I watched this: [video]http://www.c-span.org/video/?321656-1/georgetown-university-ebola-conference[/video]

What happens if the Ebola virus spreads in the West? Like through Greece, Denmark, Poland, Italy, Spain, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. This outbreak is already the worst on record. President Obama, the U.N. General Secretary, the U.N. Security Council, the C.D.C., and the World Health Organization have all sounded the alarm about the Ebola virus.

The virus is outpacing the global response, the mortality rate is over 70%, and is spread through bodily fluids.

So what happens if Ebola spreads into the West?

1) Less than 100 dead, minimal government intervention
2) More than 100 dead, moderate government intervention
3) More than 1,000 dead, large government intervention
4) More than 1,000,000 dead, extreme government intervention

shouldn't we jump to large or extreme intervention after learning of the 1st cases to try and prevent the larger numbers?

 

[greatar4]

That would cause thousands of people to lose their lives. This outbreak is on of the worst that has ever affected the world.

 

[Van Basten]

shouldn't we jump to large or extreme intervention after learning of the 1st cases to try and prevent the larger numbers?

That's what would happen. Major (or "extreme" as the poll goes) government intervention would be there from the start as it should be.

 

[Jango]

shouldn't we jump to large or extreme intervention after learning of the 1st cases to try and prevent the larger numbers?

That's what would happen. Major (or "extreme" as the poll goes) government intervention would be there from the start as it should be.

When I said this:

1) Less than 100 dead, minimal government intervention
2) More than 100 dead, moderate government intervention
3) More than 1,000 dead, large government intervention
4) More than 1,000,000 dead, extreme government intervention

Here's what I'm saying: take #1 for instance, what I mean by 'minimal government intervention' is the amount of people the government directly interacts with by the protocols they would be following. Like, say a small town (like the one I live in est. 3,600 people) is the source of the outbreak, they would quarantine the town, not everyone in the United States. But if the outbreak originated from say, the Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport, which would mean that it would spread far and wide inside the U.S., nation wide quarantine protocols would be initiated, as in, the government would directly interact with every American citizen that they came into contact with.

My apologies for the confusion.

 

[Van Basten]

When I said this:



Here's what I'm saying: take #1 for instance, what I mean by 'minimal government intervention' is the amount of people the government directly interacts with by the protocols they would be following. Like, say a small town (like the one I live in est. 3,600 people) is the source of the outbreak, they would quarantine the town, not everyone in the United States. But if the outbreak originated from say, the Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport, which would mean that it would spread far and wide inside the U.S., nation wide quarantine protocols would be initiated, as in, the government would directly interact with every American citizen that they came into contact with.

My apologies for the confusion.

Oh, that makes more sense.

 

[clownboy]

We don't quarantine anymore and people here will not stay put anyway. In the case of ebola, the survivalists will go to their bunkers and the infected will be crying about their civil rights being violated.

 

[Lursa]

That would cause thousands of people to lose their lives. This outbreak is on of the worst that has ever affected the world.

It's not even remotely close to that.

Previous outbreaks historically of measles, smallpox, bubonic plague, cholera, yellow fever, influenza, etc killed hundreds of thousands to millions.

Ebola is not as easily spread as any of those. And in a country with better sanitation and medical practices and less uneducated family involvement, it could be pretty well contained in its present state.

The sad thing however, would be that it would then become endemic in the US and could crop up again at any time. And it's still a horrible disease.

This happened with bubonic plague. It still circulates here out West in rodent populations. Fortunately we have a cure for the plague.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Interesting article about CDC projections....

CDC: Ebola Could Infect 1.4 M by 2015

If the battle to contain/combat Ebola aggressively continues, CDC projections estimate that the crisis will reach a tipping point in January 2015 and start to recede from that point on.

 

[Lursa]

We don't quarantine anymore and people here will not stay put anyway. In the case of ebola, the survivalists will go to their bunkers and the infected will be crying about their civil rights being violated.

???? Seriously? What do you think the govt's plans consist of? At nearly every community and state and the fed level.

Quarantine and ALL the removal of rights that that entails including martial law and shooting people that break quarantine. It will be incredibly ugly and it wont even work in a wide-spread airborne epidemic but that doesnt mean that those arent the plans and they'll still attempt it before failing.

 

[clownboy]

???? Seriously? What do you think the govt's plans consist of? At nearly every community and state and the fed level.

Quarantine and ALL the removal of rights that that entails including martial law and shooting people that break quarantine. It will be incredibly ugly and it wont even work in a wide-spread airborne epidemic but that doesnt mean that those arent the plans and they'll still attempt it before failing.

We don't even quarantine infectious TB anymore. I still believe we could have stopped, or at least significantly reduced the AIDS epidemic here if we had quarantined in the very beginning when we first became aware. And good luck with getting people to follow the government's plans in this sort of situation.

 

[Lursa]

We don't even quarantine infectious TB anymore. I still believe we could have stopped, or at least significantly reduced the AIDS epidemic here if we had quarantined in the very beginning when we first became aware. And good luck with getting people to follow the government's plans in this sort of situation.

What does that have to do with anything?

The outcry will be incredible. AIDS was not perceived as a threat to 'good people.' Just gays and addicts. It wasnt airborne. The civil rights outrage would have been nuts.

It will be incredibly terrible in a truly dangerous epidemic. The govt will try...and fail...but it will be a nightmare. Of course people wont follow govt plans. When things get tough, they'll panic. Troops will end up killing people, neighbors will end up killing people, troops will abandon their posts and go home, so will cops, etc.

But denying it doesnt mean this isnt the case.

 

[clownboy]

What does that have to do with anything?

The outcry will be incredible. AIDS was not perceived as a threat to 'good people.' Just gays and addicts. It wasnt airborne. The civil rights outrage would have been nuts.

It will be incredibly terrible in a truly dangerous epidemic. The govt will try...and fail...but it will be a nightmare. Of course people wont follow govt plans. When things get tough, they'll panic. Troops will end up killing people, neighbors will end up killing people, troops will abandon their posts and go home, so will cops, etc.

But denying it doesnt mean this isnt the case.

That's interesting, you're just restating what I said would happen and yet somehow disagree with me? Weird.

 

[Threegoofs]

Assuming the virus does not change its route of transmission, any outbreak will be minimal in western countries.

This virus needs to be spread by blood and fluid contact, similar to HIV. But people are not reserviors of this virus like HIV, and if you make it thru, you are immune, much like a flu. Western medicine, with use of gloves, gowns and santitation and disposable sharps make this a non issue.

Unless, of course, a mutation allows it to spread via air or contact via hand surfaces. Then we're talking a big mess.

 

[Lursa]

That's interesting, you're just restating what I said would happen and yet somehow disagree with me? Weird.

No, I did not reiterate this:

We don't even quarantine infectious TB anymore. I still believe we could have stopped, or at least significantly reduced the AIDS epidemic here if we had quarantined in the very beginning when we first became aware. And good luck with getting people to follow the government's plans in this sort of situation.

 

[DA60]

How on Earth should I know?

 

[clownboy]

No, I did not reiterate this:

Actually you did reiterate that last point (the rest you didn't even comment upon):

Quote Originally Posted by clownboy

We don't even quarantine infectious TB anymore. I still believe we could have stopped, or at least significantly reduced the AIDS epidemic here if we had quarantined in the very beginning when we first became aware. And good luck with getting people to follow the government's plans in this sort of situation.

It will be incredibly terrible in a truly dangerous epidemic. The govt will try...and fail...but it will be a nightmare. Of course people wont follow govt plans. When things get tough, they'll panic. Troops will end up killing people, neighbors will end up killing people, troops will abandon their posts and go home, so will cops, etc.

 

[Lursa]

Actually you did reiterate that last point (the rest you didn't even comment upon):

Yes, I responded to why your comparisons to TB etc were not representative of what is actually planned in a serious infectious epidemic

And you dismissed the quarantine saying people wouldnt cooperate. Implying that the govt wouldnt bother since that would be the outcome. If I read that implication incorrectly, I apologize but in general your entire response minimized and dismissed the true nature of what the govt plans and it's outcome.

That was certainly not the tone or perspective in my response.

 

[Jango]

Oh ****!: CDC Confirms Patient In Dallas Has The Ebola Virus « CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

 

[Superfly]

I started this thread several months ago regarding the spread while it was still in Africa.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/off-t...west-africa-says-doctors-without-borders.html

Now it's here.

 

[Jango]

I started this thread several months ago regarding the spread while it was still in Africa.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/off-t...west-africa-says-doctors-without-borders.html

Now it's here.

And we're getting into the frozen months, when sickness is widely prevalent. Swell!

 

[Superfly]

Assuming the virus does not change its route of transmission, any outbreak will be minimal in western countries.

This virus needs to be spread by blood and fluid contact, similar to HIV. But people are not reserviors of this virus like HIV, and if you make it thru, you are immune, much like a flu. Western medicine, with use of gloves, gowns and santitation and disposable sharps make this a non issue.

Unless, of course, a mutation allows it to spread via air or contact via hand surfaces. Then we're talking a big mess.

According to what I just read via the WHO and the CDC, it can be spread by touch. It's why they are telling everyone to stay clean, wear gloves around infected, avoid infected, don't touch anything, avoid healthcare facilities where there are infected, WASH YOUR HANDS, use alcohol-based hand sanitizers.

By touch? That's terrifying. Not as scary as airborne, but still scary.

 

[Urethra Franklin]

We don't even quarantine infectious TB anymore. I still believe we could have stopped, or at least significantly reduced the AIDS epidemic here if we had quarantined in the very beginning when we first became aware. And good luck with getting people to follow the government's plans in this sort of situation.

Sorry but I find these to be extremely poor analogies.

In most countries people with active, open TB are hospitalised and looked after in respiratory isolation until they've had several days of anti-TB therapy and are no longer infectious. That's a reasonable measure and the vast majority of hospitalised TB patients don't pass on their infection to others. No panic. In many places it's mandatory for health care workers to have had the BCG vaccine (against TB). TB cannot be compared to Ebola.

And neither can AIDS. AIDS is a pandemic, not an epidemic. Quarantine would have been and still is totally unnecessary as to limit its spread you limit at risk behaviours, that's all. Without HIV testing the whole world you wouldn't know who to quarantine anyway. What was missing in the early days was education and adequate access to counselling, testing, condoms, needle exchange etc. As somebody else has pointed out, society didn't really care if it was only gays and drug addicts dropping dead. And a few Haitians? Well they're black, and poor, and not going to enrich the pharmaceutical industry particularly, and there perhaps we have the reason why we've to date not seen massive funds put into researching diseases like Ebola, Malaria etc.

Ebola is not new. But we've waited until we we perceive a potential threat to ourselves to get upset about it. Funny that.

 

[grip]

I started this thread several months ago regarding the spread while it was still in Africa.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/off-t...west-africa-says-doctors-without-borders.html

Now it's here.

As long as it doesn't become more highly contagious than it currently is and mutate into an airborne version, it'll probably not be rampant. They've already got a few antiviruses being experimented on, and a pretty good treatment plan. Hep-C and HIV actually scare me as much, though they're not as quick to kill.

 

[Superfly]

Ebola is not new. But we've waited until we we perceive a potential threat to ourselves to get upset about it. Funny that.

I saw this a couple of weeks ago. It's supposed to be a funny meme, but it's really not that funny when you think about how many people have died from Ebola.