|
Xandu posted:At that point, it probably doesn't, just becomes something to be contained. What does that mean? Some non-negligible number of people in Africa die from Ebola from now on (like malaria, etc)? Kobayashi fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Sep 4, 2014 |
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:04 |
|
|
That's what I was thinking of, but it's different I guess since people aren't catching malaria from each either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Xandu posted:At that point, it probably doesn't, just becomes something to be contained. Not going to empty-quote, essentially this. Various national governments already see it beyond the point of halting, and are acting accordingly with their resources. Hence the limited international military bioterrorism response to the hotzone. Due to liability laws, there's a shortage of PPE in the West and production cannot keep up with demand. DuPont and 3M are expanding mass production capacity, however this takes time. I've been trying to find more details on the PPE production chain at DuPont, however its a bit too specific to be found in company reports and a bit too abstract to find good proxies (new hirings, disclosed deals with suppliers). The short of my impression is that, at this time, demand far outstrips supply and will for some time. Hence CDC's attempts at improving supply chain sourcing and searching for scalable and effective alternative productions. Viewed from that frame, WHO's pleas to continue flights and shipping will be ineffective, as they fail to address very real and very costly concerns. All shipping and airline operators are mandated to disclose any and all suspected illnesses aboard their vessels to relevant reporting agencies or else face strict liability for any result which occurs due to their negligence. Any shipowner which discloses to a regulatory agency that a member of their crew has fallen ill with symptoms similar to EVD AND has docked in a known pandemic region will see an immediate increase in the costs, if not voiding of, insurance policies. Further, their ship, which may have additional contractual commitments, will be unable to meet these, as it is unknown whether all ports of call will allow a ship with an EVD suspected case to dock. Certainly, it would be the most popular political option for port operators, and the most prudent financial option. In addition, various transport operators fall under separate regulatory environments; for instance, AirFrance ceased its flights due to an inability to source non-risk healthcare provision for their crew, should they fall ill in the infected region. The alternative to this was facing an absolute union strike on all levels and all of AirFrance's operations in the world coming to a halt. So, apart from urging continued flights and coordinating meetings with carriers, what can WHO do to respond to this crisis? Frankly, the answer is 'very little.' Economies of scale are at play now, and WHO has no authority to compel action. IMO, the best-case for this outbreak is already past control and has moved into containment planning. Hence the EU's latest risk-assessment, drafted before the full scale of the Port Harcourt incident became known. National governments are expecting an outbreak in their nation and reserving the required resources necessary to fully contain such a situation. Truly, the only effective response now at controlling, and not containing, EBD will require an international body with authoritative mandate and stakeholder independence, one able administer its own taxes and force compliance through regulatory mechanisms. Something which WHO and UN are not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
I can think of an organization that can project enough force to maintain order and has over 5000 doctors on staff that can be compelled to go to Africa, if need be. Though, I doubt they would be saying, "The love of liberty brought us here" if they went to treat Ebola.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:What does that mean? Some non-negligible number of people in Africa die from Ebola from now on (like malaria, etc)? It will never be like malaria because the disease is not very adapt in maintaining production of virus particles for longer then a month due to most patients dying or clearing the virus. Malaria patients often live for a long time and with the help of the mosquito vectors act as a persistent reservoir for wave after wave after wave of new infections. Even if by some voodoo magic 50% of Africans are infected by Ebola today the disease is in theory still stoppable as patients rapidly die, survive and possibly become immune or avoid close contact with symptomatic patients. Back to reality, a very small part of the population is infected, the WHO estimate is that the total number is going to be ~20.000 infected and thus ~10.000 dead and so far the WHO or CDC has not changed this estimate. These thousands of deaths are tragedy that hopefully is never repeated again and leads to regulatory changes. Meanwhile multi-millions of Africans/Asians/poor people this year will die of neglected tropical diseases that simply lack the Hollywood factor that Ebola has and therefor will probably never get the news coverage or the special SA thread that EVD gets. Criminal lack of worldwide involvement to stop or cure infectious diseases in poor countries is not a EBV exclusive but appears to be a part of the human condition. Every time you read a news article or watch a BREAKING NEWS update describing the horror of the Ebola epidemic unfolding, do show your concern and support an increase in WHO funding and donate to doctors without borders. However, I also implore you to keep this context in mind as well: In 2009 the WHO estimated that for 200 million a year during 5-7 years the suffering of 1 billion people from neglected tropical infectious diseases could be eliminated. Update: 5 years later and we have failed most of these people. Chances are you've never heard this before. These figures were not a reason for concern as these are not sexy diseases that speak to the imagination of viewers/readers/the general public. As of yet, EVD is not even close to becoming the shadow of one of the more important infectious diseases ravaging Africa right now. Nevertheless, all attention on Ebola is an important first humanitarian step, even though it is ( in my humble opinion ) a bit misguided. Source: http://www.who.int/neglected_diseases/diseases/NTD_Report_APPMG.pdf
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
Isn't the outbreak entirely uncontained at this point? What possible reason do we have to believe it will stop at 20k infected. Its not like ebola.gif that gets posted every week shows signs of leveling off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Isn't the outbreak entirely uncontained at this point? What possible reason do we have to believe it will stop at 20k infected. Yeah, you'd basically need a large scale intervention by the U.S. military to even have a hope of stopping it at this point and that just isn't going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
From a few pages ago, this guy calculated chance of international spread using a Monte Carlo process to produce a model which then projects deaths. I'm not a statistician so I can't really criticize his methods. Of note, however, is that severity of the outbreak already exceeds the top end (>95th%) of his model for Aug 31. Another guy put out this paper which models the outbreak using differential equations. He concludes that both Guinea and Sierra Leone have achieved good control of their outbreaks while Liberia is uncontrolled. However, this was only accounting for data up to Aug. 20th. Since then both Guinea and Sierra Leone have had 170 and 300 new cases respectively, far exceeding his model. It appears that in the last two weeks of August, his model has broken down for Guinea and Sierra Leone. Maybe the number of cases finally exceeded those countries' health care capacity to contain the outbreak? If there was control, shouldn't you see the number of cases fall below exponential growth? Instead it's increasing due to any number of factors, and it's increasing in places that were previously doing well. I think that 20,000 estimate is a pipe dream at this point. Lote fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
So, are we still assuming Western countries can contain it and the third world is screwed, or?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
If nothing else, militarized police with fuckin' near-tanks and biohazard gear should be able to enforce quarantines in America.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 02:42
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Yeah, you'd basically need a large scale intervention by the U.S. military to even have a hope of stopping it at this point and that just isn't going to happen. http://www.africom.mil/ if you want to know what the U.S. military is up to in Africa. At least the stuff that is being made public. Nintendo Kid posted:If nothing else, militarized police with fuckin' near-tanks and biohazard gear should be able to enforce quarantines in America. god i hope not. it would turn into a bloodbath. it would be bad.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:29
|
|
Pillowpants posted:So, are we still assuming Western countries can contain it and the third world is screwed, or? Due to the different resources, policy systems, education levels, and political agendas involved, it would be relatively easy.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
Unhinged Vulcan posted:god i hope not. it would turn into a bloodbath. it would be bad. Do you not remember the way the police got nearly the entire population of Boston to stay inside while the manhunt went on? Not what I'd call a bloodbath, and that was accomplished despite not being mandatory. Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Due to the different resources, policy systems, education levels, and political agendas involved, it would be relatively easy. "Relatively" being the operative word. I suppose it depends upon the route of transmission, the arrival location, and the civilian reaction. Worst-case for Europe, in my mind, is refugees on boats cross the Mediteranian and a large population is exposed before the outbreak is noticed. Certainly would have political implications throughout Europe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
Unhinged Vulcan posted:god i hope not. it would turn into a bloodbath. it would be bad. Yeah, after the whole Ferguson thing I'm pretty sure a lot of American police departments would interpret a quarantine order as permission to go on a full-bore Zombie Apocalypse LARP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:What does that mean? Some non-negligible number of people in Africa die from Ebola from now on (like malaria, etc)? It means the Earth is pissed off. If this gets really serious and spreads, it is what everyone has been fearing for a long time. We all knew a virus was going to come along and kill us. I doubt it is Ebola unless it changes how it works, however. Pohl fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
The CDC has its poo poo together, from the articles I've read ( ). I have full confidence that even in a catastrophic scenario, say, tens of millions dead worldwide or more, fewer than 50 Americans will be infected and die in the USA before the outbreak dies out.  Those who are infected and die abroad don't count towards getting me banned
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Due to the different resources, policy systems, education levels, and political agendas involved, it would be relatively easy. Yeah, this continues to be overlooked by some people. The West African outbreak is out of control for a few key reasons: 1) A lack of equipment and trained personnel. 2) Patients who believe that ebola isn't real, and treatment centres will kill them. 3) A lack of adequate water for basic hygiene purposes like hand-washing. Removing any two of these factors would greatly, greatly impede the outbreak.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Do you not remember the way the police got nearly the entire population of Boston to stay inside while the manhunt went on? Not what I'd call a bloodbath, and that was accomplished despite not being mandatory. That occurred immediately after two bombs exploded in public, killed three people and injured over two hundred. Everyone was scared shitless, so of course they cooperated. I don't think you'd see nearly the same level of cooperation in the case of an ebola outbreak. America has an insane number of people who are both ignorant about health issues and distrustful of government in general. A sizable chunk, especially in places like the Deep South, would see any quarantine as an attempt by Obama to install Sharia law. They would grab their guns and battle the police and the national guard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:That occurred immediately after two bombs exploded in public, killed three people and injured over two hundred. Everyone was scared shitless, so of course they cooperated. So let's say 50 people dying horribly, no one will be scared shitless of this happening in their town? You've got to be kidding. enraged_camel posted:A sizable chunk, especially in places like the Deep South, would see any quarantine as an attempt by Obama to install Sharia law. They would grab their guns and battle the police and the national guard. And we'll all be better off when those people are arrested and kept off the streets, which they will be since the hunting store's fanciest gun ain't gonna do poo poo against the bomb resistant armored personnel carriers the Shitsville, Oklahoma PD just got from Iraq War surplus sales.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:So let's say 50 people dying horribly, no one will be scared shitless of this happening in their town? You've got to be kidding. Did they die because of ebola, or because of Obama's death panels??????
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
IAMNOTADOCTOR posted:It will never be like malaria because the disease is not very adapt in maintaining production of virus particles for longer then a month due to most patients dying or clearing the virus. Malaria patients often live for a long time and with the help of the mosquito vectors act as a persistent reservoir for wave after wave after wave of new infections. Even if by some voodoo magic 50% of Africans are infected by Ebola today the disease is in theory still stoppable as patients rapidly die, survive and possibly become immune or avoid close contact with symptomatic patients. I stand chastised. (In my defense, my reference to malaria was an attempt to recognize that people are dying needless deaths anyway. Something about Ebola being part of some "new normal" piques my lizard brain, though.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
At this point I don't see how the infected countries will survive as states. As the severity of the outbreak increases it has to reach a point at which those governments completely fall. When borders are sealed, food shipments stop, and the riots began in earnest the situation on the ground will be complete anarchy with whatever is left of those governments as just another faction with guns. By the time the Western public gets around to realizing the severity of the humanitarian crisis and starts demanding the (nominal) response it will be too little too late. I truly believe that we will soon see a significant portion of the African continent dissolve into massive upheaval and anarchy as governments fall and people starve. Ebola doesn't have to kill that many to create the conditions necessary for this to happen, and 20k is obviously a pipe dream.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Did they die because of ebola, or because of Obama's death panels?????? Those people will barricade themselves in their lovely mini-fuhrerbunkers they love so much and thus self-quarantine. Issue cleared.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Those people will barricade themselves in their lovely mini-fuhrerbunkers they love so much and thus self-quarantine. Issue cleared. Or they will perceive it as an existential threat, form militias with their idiot friends and try to fight off the quarantine forces.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:That occurred immediately after two bombs exploded in public, killed three people and injured over two hundred. Everyone was scared shitless, so of course they cooperated. It would probably be alright considering that the bumfuck Deep South backwoods are not the kind of place where an outbreak would start. You would likely be looking at some East Coast shipping hub or other where people have a proportionately higher trust in infrastructure and do not have large arsenals of high-powered weapons in their basement-bunkers. PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 05:35 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Or they will perceive it as an existential threat, form militias with their idiot friends and try to fight off the quarantine forces. And then they will die or be arrested, which will be good. Like I said, Freeper McGee's Tacticlol AR 15 isn't going to do poo poo against the Bumston County Sheriff's MRAP fleet and SWAT team. They'll also be tiny outliers who won't be likely to be exposed to the virus to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Or they will perceive it as an existential threat, form militias with their idiot friends and try to fight off the quarantine forces. That's still better than what some people have been doing in Africa. I mean at least they'd be fighting cops instead of raiding hospitals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:That's still better than what some people have been doing in Africa. I mean at least they'd be fighting cops instead of raiding hospitals. I find the easiest way to understand likely responses to epidemics is to look at the history of previous outbreaks. For instance, all this talk about the deep south. What's most likely is self-isolation at the community level in rural areas; during the Spanish Influenza epidemic, small towns essentially closed their borders to outsiders/those unknown to the community, while isolating returning troops/community travelers within their homes with all windows shut and no visitors allowed. So, walled towns, with the walls being imaginary boundary lines enforced by the town sherriff. In West Africa, outside of certain urban areas there simply isn't that well of an organized state. I do believe that West Africa will recover from this outbreak, perhaps as more developed than they were before the outbreak. Inbetween those two extremes lies death wholesale. Oh, I recently read Firestone is shutting down its latex plantations in West Africa. Will be interesting to see what other indirect economic effects occur due to the supply-chain clusterfuck that is EVD.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:48
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:"Relatively" being the operative word. I suppose it depends upon the route of transmission, the arrival location, and the civilian reaction. Worst-case for Europe, in my mind, is refugees on boats cross the Mediteranian and a large population is exposed before the outbreak is noticed. Certainly would have political implications throughout Europe. "relatively" would still be without serious incident. The largest single difference is that the vast, vast majority of the population of West European countries and the US understand germ theory.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
China comes to the rescue! With $5 million, out of $600 mil requested by the WHO lol http://www.ibtimes.com/ebola-outbreak-2014-china-adds-international-aid-efforts-1677644 Clearly world governments aren't particularly concerned.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 11:15
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The largest single difference is that the vast, vast majority of the population of West European countries and the US understand germ theory. Assuming this is true, how would you go about making the affected populations in West Africa understand germ theory?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
Kopijeger posted:Assuming this is true, how would you go about making the affected populations in West Africa understand germ theory? Well, that's really the million dollar question, isn't it now? People in this thread have already explained quite well why some of the affected communities don't believe Ebola is real, and why some may hesitate to seek treatment even if they do believe it's real. It's hard to undo that sort of cultural inertia, especially in the poorest and least educated communities, and even more especially in the middle of an outbreak like this. It turns out, now, that there was a very good reason we should've been supported education initiatives for the developing world all along. Hopefully, after this outbreak is over, we'll learn from this and do something about it so we don't have to deal with this issue the next time around.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:China comes to the rescue! With $5 million, out of $600 mil requested by the WHO lol EU just gave 180m, so it's a start.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 14:34
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Do you not remember the way the police got nearly the entire population of Boston to stay inside while the manhunt went on? Not what I'd call a bloodbath, and that was accomplished despite not being mandatory. Do you not remember Katrina? Or the L.A. Riots? They literally called in the Marines. And that was over the verdict of the Rodney King beating. Let's say the North-East Region of the US experiences an outbreak. I say the North-East because of all the travel from Boston to NYC to Philadelphia to D.C. on a daily basis. Imagine how quickly a few individuals making stops at Grand Central or 30th Street stations could pass it on to just 1 other individual, and so on. It could then require quarantines, curfews, travel restrictions, and very large areas being cordoned off. The Police do not have the resources to both protect the public, and themselves, from not just getting infected, but from groups which would exploit the situation. And if you don't think there are groups which would exploit such a situation, check out the SPLC's website. So you are certain that The United States population would be receptive to this:  A soldier in MOPP level 4 protective gear. It protects the individual from Radiological, Biological, and Chemical agents. It could very easily turn chaotic, and extremely violent. And that's why I said I hope not. e:not worth it. Kempo Yellow Belt fucked around with this message at 15:57 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Xandu posted:EU just gave 180m, so it's a start. Think the US pledged $75 million last night. So they are still not even half way to the $600 million requested, never mind the requested 1,000's of medical staff as well, and this is after all the major countries have chipped in so they really have 0 chance of meeting it unless a wealthy Billionaire steps in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Unhinged Vulcan posted:So you are certain that The United States population would be receptive to this: Yes. Because what are they going to do about it, fight the guy with gun and armored hazmat suit just to rub against an ebola dude?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Yes. Because what are they going to do about it, fight the guy with gun and armored hazmat suit just to rub against an ebola dude? edit: poo poo, sorry thought I was in the GBS thread not D&D.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Yeah, I actually think that Ebola is one infectious disease the US could actually deal with by heavy quarantine. People are mortified of a disease that is so dramatic with such high lethality, so they will avoid putting themselves at risk. Since it is transmitted by contact, people will feel safer in their homes anyway, which means respect for the quarantine. People outside the quarantine would largely say "whatever, deal with it." The greater populace would not be an issue, all the difficulty would be in dealing with the cases who are at high risk of exposure but asymptomatic. I don't see it working so well for something like a nasty flu strain, since many people would perceive a regional quarantine as increasing their risk of infection.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:04 |
|
|
disheveled posted:Yeah, I actually think that Ebola is one infectious disease the US could actually deal with by heavy quarantine. People are mortified of a disease that is so dramatic with such high lethality, so they will avoid putting themselves at risk. Since it is transmitted by contact, people will feel safer in their homes anyway, which means respect for the quarantine. People outside the quarantine would largely say "whatever, deal with it." The greater populace would not be an issue, all the difficulty would be in dealing with the cases who are at high risk of exposure but asymptomatic. Counterpoint- rent's gotta be paid, mortgage isn't going to go away. Heat is a must in winter, and food is a must at all times. Most people have no cash reserves, and that means going to work regardless. Even when the state has been shut down for blizzards and the Boston Bombing, retail guys still had to go to work. If the options are risk ebola or be homeless for sure, most folks will roll the dice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 16:59
|
|