Ebola Outbreak in exponential growth


Exponential as in rate of growth is proportional to size of current infected population, or exponential as in the journalist-speak word for "really fast"
 
Exponential as in rate of growth is proportional to size of current infected population, or exponential as in the journalist-speak word for "really fast"
The former.

"An epidemic of Ebola virus disease (EVD) is ongoing in certain West African countries."

"On 14 October, during a news conference in Geneva, the assistant director-general of the WHO stated that there could be as many as 10,000 new Ebola cases per week by December 2014"
 
Our society just does not have the resources to contain a serious outbreak
Seems to me like a lack of geo-political will rather than a lack of resources that has lead to a failure to contain the outbreak.
 

Pretty sure that if the wealthy nations of the world pretended Ebola was a 'terrorist threat' and spent even a fraction of the Trillions of Dollars used to combat ISIS / Al Qaeda / imaginary WMDs then this could be controlled fairly easily. What is needed is a rigourously enforced quarantine zone backed up with massive amounts of food / medical / financial aid. 

The greatest fear is that Ebola will spread throughout the developing world and become endemic with the associated additional risk of mutation to a form that can be spread like the common cold.
 
No telling what will stop it, if anything.

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

I just talked to someone who transported a patient in Germany.

This has the potential to be big. Our society just does not have the resources to contain a serious outbreak.
People saying it's exponential have obviously never seen an exponential curve before.

And what will stop it? Hygiene, as usual. You reduce severly the risk of infection when washing hands and yourself. 

The greatest fear is that Ebola will spread throughout the developing world and become endemic with the associated additional risk of mutation to a form that can be spread like the common cold.
That's very unlikely, and just like the plague that could easily be stopped by doing major quarantine measures. Really it's just a matter of being very methodic about it, until you actually get a cure. 
 
That's very unlikely
The WHO and others are seriously worried that Ebola will become endemic, I'm happy to bow to their judgement that this is a serious and genuine concern.

As for the mutation bit I've got no idea how likely/possible that would be but, using logic alone, it does not seem to me to be a huge evolutionary leap for the disease to become communicable via coughing / sneezing as the current method of infection is via any sort of bodily fluid.

It is beginning to look like a vaccine is the only real hope as there is no genuine will / current capability to enforce a rigorous quarantine zone around Guinea / Liberia & Sierra Leone.
 
The ebola epidemic is currently undergoing exponential growth.. if what I have read is correct, the doubling rate is once every three weeks.

That is 17 doublings per year.

Take the roughly 4500 now living out of 8998 total reported infected, times 2^17, and that gives you 590 million infected people this time next year.

Now that is almost a worst case scenario, unless "something is done".

But

Is there enough political will to quarantine west africa? With troops on the borders etc?

How would an outbreak in your country be handled? Where do you put infectious people if hospitals are hopelessly flooded with patientes?

Will the two vaccines currently under development be approved and if so, when will they be available in billions of doses?

What will happen if the virus becomes airborne?

I wonder, what will society look like a year from now?

Cheers
 
Let ED handle the quarantine part.  He will quarantine each sick patient by giving each of them a an OpenPandora, and I'm sure they will sit still in one place enjoying the freedom and openness this device gives them ;)  
 
It's really worse than that. Real life is unlike video games; let's say, in starcraft, you are down to your last drone you can still build up everything in no time. 

In real life, once the public confidence is lost and fear starts to shake the very foundation of the nation, people will refuse to do their job in fear of death and it's a downwards spiral from there. 

It doesn't have to even be a epidemic. What happened to Germany after world war 1 or soviet russian's dissolution are good examples. 

However, in real life, diseases have never been able to even damage a developed country's stability. From what I have heard and read, African countries is about as educated and civilized as medieval Europe. Not only do they not have medical infrastructure that is needed to contain a plague like this, many of those citizens lack an understanding of the transmission mechanics of ebola. Thus, panic spreads like wild fire in western African like wild fire. In the worst case scenario, all the cures fail and Ebola starts to spread in our countries, there will be martial law to keep things in check and it will be justified. 

There does not exist a scientifically proven cure for ebola as I'm typing, the tried and right way to contain a plague like this is simply stop the spreading, and let it burn itself out. 

I want to make a joke about a bullet to the heads of the patients and a healthy dose of purifying gasoline is the cure, but I'm above that.  :(

The truth standing is, giving ebola patients healthcare is only adding to the risk of spreading the disease. However, mercy killing them, or simply throw and lock them away may be too cruel and that inhuman action may destabilize the society more than the good it does AT THIS STAGE. 

EDIT:  From many sources it's stated that Ebola can mutate as fast as regular flu, and there are previous cases in which a disease has mutated additional ways to transmit. A prime example is the black death. It can be transmitted by bitten by bacteria carrying fleas or by inhalation of aerosolised plague. The affected nurse doesn't not know exactly how she was infected with full protective gears, and those healthcare workers in Africa are dying by the hundreds. It's inaccurate to say you won't be infected so long as you are not kissing or having intercourses with the infected. How some politicians could say that is egotistic and beyond stupidity in the same way some people are bragging about they haven been bitten by a few snakes and are still alive. 
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's very unlikely
 
The WHO and others are seriously worried that Ebola will become endemic, I'm happy to bow to their judgement that this is a serious and genuine concern.


As for the mutation bit I've got no idea how likely/possible that would be but, using logic alone, it does not seem to me to be a huge evolutionary leap for the disease to become communicable via coughing / sneezing as the current method of infection is via any sort of bodily fluid.


It is beginning to look like a vaccine is the only real hope as there is no genuine will / current capability to enforce a rigorous quarantine zone around Guinea / Liberia & Sierra Leone.
The who is a band of clowns. EVERY two years they come back with scare tactics, h1n1, sars. Etc instead of focusing on the major killer diseases out there.

They are about as useless at stopping diseases as the UN is useless at stopping wars.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As for the mutation bit I've got no idea how likely/possible that would be but, using logic alone, it does not seem to me to be a huge evolutionary leap for the disease to become communicable via coughing / sneezing as the current method of infection is via any sort of bodily fluid.
Does not work like that. When the virus mutates not only one variable changes. It may spread more easily but be less virulent. Or even more virulent, killing the host twice faster and therefore limiting the spread of the disease. If that were that easy we would be surrounded by killer diseases by now, yet this is FAR from being the case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Keep in mind that USA is heading into an election cycle.  Big, scary news stories should always be consumed with caution. When the USA political parties are in their latest death-dance, hands locked around each others necks, this is even moreso true.
 
Take the roughly 4500 now living out of 8998 total reported infected, times 2^17, and that gives you 590 million infected people this time next year.
This kind of extrapolation is kid-level of logic. Just like XKCD says. so yesterday before your wedding your had zero husband, today you got married and got 1 husband, and in three weeks looks like you are going to have 57 of them.

There's nothing exponential in the spread if it does STAY exponential forever. You are just looking at a few datapoints and it could be polynomial rather than exponential.  
 
I shall play Devil's Advocate then:

The advice which I give to anyone with a broken computer, a simple cold, or real personal problems is as follows:

Purge it with fire!
 
The who is a band of clowns. EVERY two years they come back with scare tactics, h1n1, sars.
Who also happen to employ some of the worlds most respected experts in the field of communicable diseases, if they say there is a danger of Ebola becoming endemic then I'm more than happy to take their word for it, can't really see how that sentiment would suit any particular agenda. Also, based on historical precedent there was pretty good reason to err on the side of caution about h1n1.

Out of interest what makes you think Ebola is unlikely to become endemic?
 

Does not work like that. When the virus mutates not only one variable changes. It may spread more easily but be less virulent.
Or maybe just one variable changes, who knows? That's the nature of random mutation. However let's say Ebola mutates so it can spread more easily,and is now as contagious as flu, but is 10 times less virulent, do the maths, if this thing spread like the Flu with a 7% mortality rate then tens of millions would die throughout the world. 
 
"On 14 October, during a news conference in Geneva, the assistant director-general of the WHO stated that there could be as many as 10,000 new Ebola cases per week by December 2014"
 im not sure if you know what the word "could" means
 
"On 14 October, during a news conference in Geneva, the assistant director-general of the WHO stated that there could be as many as 10,000 new Ebola cases per week by December 2014"
 im not sure if you know what the word "could" means
I know what the word "could" means.

Ebolas R0 is roughly 2, currently, in west-africa - meaning on average one infected person infects 2 others. It is possible that in western countries the R value could be lower due to better hygiene (washing hands) and quicker isolation of patients. If it became airborne the R value would increase dramatically.

It IS propagating exponentially, with a doubling period of approximately 3 weeks. 10,000 cases per week by december is a prognosis based on sound epidemiological methodology - not scare tactics.

EDIT: Another estimate by a reputable institute is for 1.5 million infected by end of January. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ebola-could-infect-one-half-million-soon-says-cdc-1467514

EDIT2: "22 September 2014 ¦ GENEVA - Unless Ebola control measures in west Africa are enhanced quickly, experts from the WHO and Imperial College, London, predict numbers will continue to climb exponentially" http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2014/ebola-study/en/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top