USArmy: Ebola virus can go airborne in low temperatures [Fr. Z]

[Exiled_Child]

If this was weapons research, do you really think that it would be published in a public medical journal?

Believe me, I’ve been asking myself the same question. It does seem odd, but then, I’m unsure how out in the open germ warfare research actually is. It seems to me that if the army takes a virus as deadly and contagious as Ebola and then works to make it transmissible by air, that the word weaponize can legitimately be used. Of course, any research along these lines that’s carried out in the public sphere would of necessity have to be described as some sort of preemptive natural disaster/terrorist attack research. I’m skeptical.

 

[JerryZ]

Hey, thanks for those links up above. That first one was from months ago… All I know is, this was news to me. It hadn’t occurred to me to look for Ebola information in such an obvious place until yesterday - stupid me. Still, I find it impossible to believe the US Army invented an insanely deadly pathogen simply in order to protect us from what they themselves had just invented! Unless I’m missing some crucial piece of information that really doesn’t make any sense. Plus, I think we could both agree that the US Army is about as benevolent as Genghis Khan.

Invented??? Where do you infer that information? The Ebola virus was known to science before this study was done. It is referenced in the same study. They merely studied the possibility of the contagiant to work via aerosol dispersion. Something the CDC is adamantly telling us “IT CANNOT HAPPEN” which flies in the face of this study results.

So nice find, except your title is completely misleading AND inaccurate. The army merely studied wether the Ebola virus could be spread via airborne dispersion. Primarily in the form of aerosols and if it did, at what concentration would be required for this method of transportation of the infection to work.
The did not create the ebola virus nor tried to weaponize it.
But recognizing the potential nefarious uses posed by it, it would be criminally negligent for them not to study the potential impact of this threat.

---

 

[Exiled_Child]

Ebola Reston is an airborne virus but it is not infectious to humans. Ebola Zaire is the virus we are dealing with now is not airborne and the chances of it mutating to become airborne are almost zero.

By any chance do you know a good source of information for me to learn more about this?

 

[Exiled_Child]

Invented??? Where do you infer that information? The Ebola virus was known to science before this study was done. It is referenced in the same study. They merely studied the possibility of the contagiant to work via aerosol dispersion. Something the CDC is adamantly telling us “IT CANNOT HAPPEN” which flies in the face of this study results.

So nice find, except your title is completely misleading AND inaccurate. The army merely studied wether the Ebola virus could be spread via airborne dispersion. Primarily in the form of aerosols and if it did, at what concentration would be required for this method of transportation of the infection to work.
The did not create the ebola virus nor tried to weaponize it.
But recognizing the potential nefarious uses posed by it, it would be criminally negligent for them not to study the potential impact of this threat.

---

It clearly states they aerosolized it.

 

[Path_Finder]

Ebola Reston is an airborne virus but it is not infectious to humans. Ebola Zaire is the virus we are dealing with now is not airborne and the chances of it mutating to become airborne are almost zero.

So you are saying this is the famous but fairly powerless Reston Virginia strain of Ebola? Wow. It’s not even a threat to humans, now I certainly don’t want to see animals hurt by it either but I had heard of the strain and like you say, the Zaire virus is the dangerous one.

Good post, thanks for pointing this out, it’s very important.

 

[Path_Finder]

Hey, thanks for those links up above. That first one was from months ago… All I know is, this was news to me. It hadn’t occurred to me to look for Ebola information in such an obvious place until yesterday - stupid me. Still, I find it impossible to believe the US Army invented an insanely deadly pathogen simply in order to protect us from what they themselves had just invented! Unless I’m missing some crucial piece of information that really doesn’t make any sense. Plus, I think we could both agree that the US Army is about as benevolent as Genghis Khan.

If your preference is living under a Caliphate, Reich or Iron Curtain, I suppose so.

 

[Exiled_Child]

So you are saying this is the famous but fairly powerless Reston Virginia strain of Ebola? Wow. It’s not even a threat to humans, now I certainly don’t want to see animals hurt by it either but I had heard of the strain and like you say, the Zaire virus is the dangerous one.

Good post, thanks for pointing this out, it’s very important.

There are currently a minimum of five different strains loose in Africa which are deadly to humans.

 

[M-Dent]

Diseases that cross species - animals to humans (zoonoses) are a quite concerning. And studying transmission is vital if one hopes to saves lives.

Critical thinking is good yet paranoia and ignorance of many functions of the US military unfortunately reminds me of listening to President Obama.

 

[Exiled_Child]

If your preference is living under a Caliphate, Reich or Iron Curtain, I suppose so.

I don’t understand what that means. Did I somehow imply I would like to live in a Caliphate?

 

[Exiled_Child]

Diseases that cross species - animals to humans (zoonoses) are a quite concerning. And studying transmission is vital if one hopes to saves lives.

Critical thinking is good yet paranoia and ignorance of many functions of the US military unfortunately reminds me of listening to President Obama.

bbc.com/news/world-africa-26735118
theguardian.com/global-development/2014/aug/04/ebola-risk-guinea-fruit-bats

Apparently, Africans are having a difficult time giving up their bat meat meals.
Some are probably forced to choose between starvation and risking it.

 

[Exiled_Child]

Invented??? Where do you infer that information? The Ebola virus was known to science before this study was done. It is referenced in the same study. They merely studied the possibility of the contagiant to work via aerosol dispersion. Something the CDC is adamantly telling us “IT CANNOT HAPPEN” which flies in the face of this study results.

So nice find, except your title is completely misleading AND inaccurate. The army merely studied wether the Ebola virus could be spread via airborne dispersion. Primarily in the form of aerosols and if it did, at what concentration would be required for this method of transportation of the infection to work.
The did not create the ebola virus nor tried to weaponize it.
But recognizing the potential nefarious uses posed by it, it would be criminally negligent for them not to study the potential impact of this threat.

---

Actually Jerry, I didn’t mean to imply the army invented Ebola in 1995, because the virus was discovered in Zaire in 1976. But when a disease mutates and its transmissibility changes it’s considered a new strain. That’s all I meant by “invented.” And you’re absolutely right about the CDC blatantly lying and saying this could never happen, because it did happen and they knew it. When I posted this I was well aware CAF members would call me “ignorant,” and of course it’s already begun, but I think this matter is very far from settled. If blindly trusting the United States Army is “wisdom,” then I would rather be “ignorant”!

 

[Path_Finder]

Not good news from info wars.

Full entry…

These stories show that there are times even when reporting is not meaning to deceive someone, we are presented with facts and often need to try to understand the whole story in full. Then at other times, reporting indeed is slanted.

Perhaps that is why it is often good to double-check with another source.

Even news sources I have watched, I have to admit they and their competitors often make mistakes or worse yet, may not be fair in reporting the news.

 

[Exiled_Child]

Yikes, what happened to the thread?!?

I see Alex Jones has also read the NCBI article. Apparently everyone was aware of that except me!

I still don’t understand how posting medical research makes me “ignorant,” “paranoid,” and a Commie/Nazi/Arab.

 

[Beautiful]

Posted on CDC.gov October 27
Epidemiological Risk Factors to Consider When Evaluating a Person for Exposure to EV

Close contact is defined as being for a prolonged period of time while not wearing appropriate PPE within approximately 3 feet (1 meter) of a person with Ebola while the person was symptomatic

While this is not medically defined as truly airborne it certainly suggests that riding on a bus, train or airplane could cause infection without appropriate PPE.
cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/exposure/risk-factors-when-evaluating-person-for-exposure.html

 

[Path_Finder]

Those Ebola Vaccines in Testing Now? You Can Thank Dick Cheney for That

dailysignal.com/2014/10/24/democrats-looking-blame-republicans-lack-ebola-vaccine-may-owe-dick-cheney-apology/

Bloomberg News reports that little money had been available to scientists to work on finding a cure to the disease. But after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Cheney, anticipating the potential for bioterrorist attacks, became the Bush White House’s point man advocating more spending to protect the nation from deadly pathogens.

 

[RGCheek]

THURSDAY, Oct. 23, 2014 (HealthDay News) – Riding a bus or an elevator full of sniffles, coughs and sneezes is one of the more unpleasant aspects of the flu season.

Those same coughs and sneezes can be downright terrifying these days, given that the Ebola epidemic in West Africa has spread a tendril into the United States with the first diagnosed cases in Dallas.

But people face no threat from Ebola due to these public sniffles, according to a panel of Ebola experts gathered by the New England Journal of Medicine for an issue briefing Wednesday.

The evidence from this epidemic, and prior Ebola outbreaks, strongly suggests that the deadly virus cannot be transmitted through a cough or sneeze, said Dr. Armand Sprecher, a public health specialist with the aid organization Doctors Without Borders.

“If there were significant airborne transmission, we would see spontaneously generated cases that were not linked to a known case. There would be cases of casual transmission,” Sprecher said in response to questions from health professionals.

When experts investigate how people have contracted Ebola, “it inevitably tracks back to a significant exposure” involving direct contact with either a very sick person or a dead body teeming with the virus, Sprecher said.

That’s why new guidelines for health care workers treating Ebola patients focus on full-body suits that leave no exposed skin, said Dr. Arjun Srinivasan, associate director for healthcare-associated infection prevention programs at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“The best evidence that we have suggests that the overwhelming route of transmission is through contact with contaminated fluids with broken skin or mucous membranes,” Srinivasan said.

consumer.healthday.com/infectious-disease-information-21/misc-infections-news-411/airborne-transmission-of-ebola-highly-unlikely-experts-say-693028.html

nypost.com/2014/10/29/cdc-admits-droplets-from-a-sneeze-could-spread-ebola/

CDC admits droplets from a sneeze could spread Ebola
Nass pointed to a poster the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention quietly released on its Web site saying the deadly virus can be spread through “droplets.”

“Droplet spread happens when germs traveling inside droplets that are coughed or sneezed from a sick person enter the eyes, nose or mouth of another person,” the poster states.

Nass slammed the contradiction.

“The CDC said it doesn’t spread at all by air, then Friday they came out with this poster,” she said. “They admit that these particles or droplets may land on objects such as doorknobs and that Ebola can be transmitted that way.”

Dr. Rossi Hassad, a professor of epidemiology at Mercy College, said droplets could remain active for up to a day.

“A shorter duration for dry surfaces like a table or doorknob, and longer durations in a moist, damp environment,” Hassad said.

The CDC is more concerned with preventing panic than in preventing the spread of Ebola.

 

[RGCheek]

There is no case in recorded history of a virus like this changing its mode of transmission. Of course mutations occur but the chances of it going airborne are practically zero.

And yet we know it has.

Funny how that works. The CDC swears Ebola isn’t airborne, then admits it can spread with droplets such as from a sneeze.

Did the Ebola change or did the CDC just lie to us?

Also it is worth noting that plenty of diseases have mutated but then scientists usually classify it as a new disease. Maybe that is part of why ‘no disease has changed its mode of transmission’? Semantics for the anti-panic win?

 

[RGCheek]

No virus that causes disease in humans has ever been known to mutate to change its mode of transmission. This means it is highly unlikely that Ebola has mutated to become airborne. It is, however, droplet-borne — and the distinction between the two is crucial.

Doctors mean something different from the public when they talk about a disease being airborne. To them, it means that the disease-causing germs are so small they can live dry, floating in the air for extended periods, thus capable of traveling from person to person at a distance. When inhaled, airborne germs make their way deep into the lungs.

Chickenpox, measles and tuberculosis are airborne diseases. Droplets of mucus and other secretions from the nose, mouth and respiratory tract transmit other diseases, including influenza and smallpox.

When someone coughs, sneezes or, in the case of Ebola, vomits, he releases a spray of secretions into the air. This makes the infection droplet-borne. Some hospital procedures, like placing a breathing tube down a patient’s air passage to help him breathe, may do the same thing.

Droplet-borne germs can travel in these secretions to infect someone a few feet away, often through the eyes, nose or mouth. This may not seem like an important difference, but it has a big impact on how easily a germ spreads. Airborne diseases are far more transmittable than droplet-borne ones.

newsmax.com/US/Ebola-droplets-Africa-air/2014/10/14/id/600727/

 

[RGCheek]

washingtonsblog.com/2014/10/sneezes-can-travel-8-feet-cdc-says-ebola-droplets-can-travel-3-feet.html

CDC Says Ebola Droplets Can Only Travel 3 Feet … But MIT Research Shows Sneezes Can Travel Up to 20 Feet

Posted on October 28, 2014 by WashingtonsBlog

Checking the CDC’s Math

This week, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) admitted that Ebola can travel through the air in aerosols, but claims that it can never go more than 3 feet.

Let’s check their math …

CDC (like the World Health Organization) admits that Ebola can be spread through sneezing or coughing.

But the CDC itself admits that flu droplets can travel 6 feet.

Mythbusters demonstrated that sneezes can nail people some 17 feet away:

I guess whether something is 3 feet in length or 17 feet is now subjective too.