USArmy: Ebola virus can go airborne in low temperatures

Not good news from info wars.

Ebola can go airborne but hasn’t in West Africa because it’s too warm, researchers conclude

Ebola can spread by air in cold, dry weather common to the U.S. but not West Africa, presenting a “possible, serious threat” to the public, according to two studies by U.S. Army scientists.

After successfully exposing monkeys to airborne Ebola, which “caused a rapidly fatal disease in 4-5 days,” scientists with the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) concluded Ebola can spread through air but likely hasn’t in Equatorial Africa because the region is too warm, with temperatures rarely dropping below 65°F.

“We… demonstrated aerosol transmission of Ebola virus at lower temperature and humidity than that normally present in sub-Saharan Africa,” the 1995 study entitled Lethal Experimental Infections of Rhesus Monkeys by Aerosolized Ebola Virus reported. “Ebola virus sensitivity to the high temperatures and humidity in the thatched, mud, and wattle huts shared by infected family members in southern Sudan and northern Zaire may have been a factor limiting aerosol transmission of Ebola virus in the African epidemics.”

“Both elevated temperature and relative humidity have been shown to reduce the aerosol stability of viruses.”

The study also referred to the 1989 Ebola outbreak at a primate quarantine facility in Reston, Va., in which the virus rapidly spread between unconnected rooms.

“While infections in adjacent cages may have occurred by droplet contact, infections in distant cages suggests aerosol transmission, as evidence of direct physical contact with an infected source could not be established,” the study added.

It is interesting to note this outbreak occurred in December 1989, when temperatures in Reston were usually below freezing, and it’s unlikely the indoor temperature in the vast quarantine facility was much higher.

A 2012 study also by the USAMRIID, which exposed monkeys to an airborne filovirus similar to Ebola, reached a similar conclusion to the 1995 study.

“There is no strong evidence of secondary transmission by the aerosol route in African filovirus outbreaks; however, aerosol transmission is thought to be possible and may occur in conditions of lower temperature and humidity which may not have been factors in outbreaks in warmer climates,” the study entitled A Characterization of Aerosolized Sudan Virus Infection in African Green Monkeys, Cynomologus Macaques and Rhesus Macaques stated.

The study pointed out that filoviruses, which include Ebola and the Sudan virus used in this particular study, have stability in aerosol form comparable to influenza.

“Filoviruses in aerosol form are therefore considered a possible, serious threat to the health and safety of the public,” it added.

And the Pentagon took this threat of airborne filoviruses so seriously that it organized a Filovirus Medical Countermeasures Workshop with the Department of Health and Human Services in 2013.

“The DoD seeks a trivalent filovirus vaccine that is effective against aerosol exposure and protective against filovirus disease for at least one year,” the executive summary of the workshop stated.

The Pentagon’s concern with airborne Ebola runs contrary to health officials who claim the disease can’t spread through coughing and sneezing, but according to the Army studies, that may only be true in tropical climates.

“How much airborne transmission will occur will be a function of how well Ebola induces coughing and sneezing in its victims in cold weather climates,” the web site suggested. “Coughing and nasal bleeding are both reported symptoms in Africa, so the worst should be expected.”

More there.

If we do not ask for miracles, God will not grant them.


Be an intercessor.

Ask God to avert this terrible disease and the consequences it will bring.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in GO TO CONFESSION, Pray For A Miracle, Semper Paratus, TEOTWAWKI, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Moral_Hazard says:

    It’s difficult to take Info Wars seriously.

  2. gatormom says:

    It’s difficult to take mainstream news seriously. Ebola should probably be taken seriously though.

  3. Kerry says:

    Vanderleun says this link “…is the most honest and most lucid 28 minutes on the status of Ebola on the Planet Earth at this moment that exists today.
    Dr. Michael Osterholm is the Director of CIDRAP, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. In the video he says they read some 900 studies/papers about ebola, 700 very in depth. One assumes they have read the study referenced at Info Wars. He did not say anything about aerosolizing at low temperatures. (Bearing in mind that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.) He speaks with great rationality and clarity. Watch it. Pray. And pray some more please.

  4. Supertradmum says:

    I, for one, think this has been allowed to go unchecked by governments who will use it for their own aggrandisement. My friends in the army tell me that home drills as earlier as 2012 were planned for epidemics-and we have over 800 fema camps, which are true, folks, as I know first hand.

    Why does not the Pope ask all Catholics around the world to fast and pray for three days against this plague? Intercessory prayers have stopped plagues before, including the big one here in Malta-when the entire country prayed to Mary, and St. Roque, as late as 75 years ago. And, the plague stopped. Here is part of the story of the latest stoppage. There was another one before that

    The population, however, perhaps disappointed by the government’s failure to halt the epidemic, turned to spiritual, time-tested, remedies.
    By mid-August people were urged to pray to St Roque, who is invoked by those afflicted by the plague. For sure, there is a whole legion of heavenly protectors whose intervention is invoked against contagious diseases, including St Charles Borromeo, St Rosalia of Palermo, St Sebastian and the Virgin Mary, but St Roque is the most popular.
    According to his colourful story, recounted in the Legenda Aurea, a medieval bestseller about the lives of saints – and other later accounts, such as Francesco Diedo’s Vita Sancti Rochi, St Roque was a mendicant pilgrim from Montpellier whose presence, time and again, had liberated whole villages from the plague.
    When he fell victim to the disease in Piacenza, he withdrew to the forest where he was cured thanks to a dog which daily brought him food and licked his wounds.
    On the feast of St Roque, August 16, which in 1936 fell on a Sunday, people were asked to attend a special evening Mass held at the church dedicated to the saint in Valletta.
    A journalist from the local Italian-language newspaper Malta, announcing the event, rightly maintained that if for centuries the Maltese had prayed to this saint to deliver them from the plague, there was nothing wrong in seeking his help and intercession again.
    The poet and dermatologist Ru?ar Briffa (1906-1963), would have certainly agreed. Then still only 30, as an assistant medical officer, he had worked “with great kindness, skill and devotion” among the patients at the Lazzaretto. He also held St Roque in special veneration and urged his patients to pray to him for deliverance from the pestilence.
    Under the old loggia at Piazza Regina (Republic Square) in Valletta, there is a ornate Baroque niche with the image of this saint. The niche dates back to the much more devastating plague of 1676 and bears the arms, emblazoned with the coat-of-arms of the Aragonese Grand Master Ramon Perellos.
    Ru?ar Briffa, who worked in a pharmacy nearby, was especially dedicated to this niche. For years he promoted its upkeep ensuring that, at least, a candle was lit daily. The devotion and interest he had managed to arouse somehow survived him, but in time the niche reverted to its dismal shabbiness.
    At some point, the St Roque painting was taken for safekeeping by the Museums Department (now Heritage Malta), where it still remains. Its deteriorated condition makes it difficult to properly date or attribute.
    However, it is in keeping with the iconography of the saint; the exposed wound or bubo on the inner thigh of the saint, the pilgrim’s staff, the cocked hat, and the friendly dog. In the background, the threatening clouds of ‘corrupt air’ are visibly gathering.
    Translated, the rather cryptic, epigrammatic Latin inscription, framed by two winged cherubs in the niche’s lower section, reads: ‘(D)eo (O)ptimo (M)aximo. To God, the Best and the Greatest. May the disease stay away from the doorway of him who lives here; let the traveller admire how this hallowed place banishes it. AD 1676.’

    Another saint invoked here is Dom Nuno Álvares Pereira, a lay person, general and then a Carmelite, one of my favorites.

  5. Michaelus says:

    You can link through to the paper. The results were obtained by squirting ebola virus into the lungs of monkeys. The relationship with temperature and humidity is interesting but unexplained. There a lots of similar viruses that have been around for ages and not killed us all.

    Soon someone should measure the amount of virus in the sneezes of an actual infected person. Even if ebola is present we should remember that even influenza is mainly transmitted by your hands – i.e. you touch a surface after someone sneezes or coughs and then put your hand in you mouth, nose or eye.

    So wash your hands before and after going to Confession!

  6. HeatherPA says:

    And a doctor who has traveled back to the USA, passed the “enhanced screening” at the airport, and was out and about in NYC all over public transport is now ill with confirmed Ebola.
    How are these people picking up Ebola when using full precautions?
    I hope you didn’t brush up against that guy or his trail when you were there, Father.

  7. Suburbanbanshee says:

    First off, the NYC doctor could have done a perfect job with his suit all during his job hours, but still have been exposed to somebody in the street or the airport with Ebola. But it’s also not easy to do a perfect job with the suits, and to have every colleague also do a perfect job.

    Second, if the NYC guy had just stayed home and played videogames until he got sick or was definitely well, he could have made life a lot easier for everyone. We need to be smart for each other’s sake and look out for each other.

    Third, we should definitely pray for each other.

  8. KateD says:

    There was a book published a number of years ago called “The Coming Plague”. Ebola was one of the viruses profiled. Scary stuff.

  9. bookworm says:

    “How are these people picking up Ebola when using full precautions?”

    A good question, but an equally good question to ask is: if Ebola is so terribly contagious, how come of all the dozens of people who were in contact with Thomas Duncan in Dallas, only TWO of them got sick? No one in his immediate family got sick, nor did the vast majority of the people working in the hospital where he presented for treatment. If Ebola were as easy to spread as the common cold or the flu, wouldn’t there be a lot more sick people in Dallas, or in Ohio (where the second Texas nurse traveled just before she got sick) by now?

    This is not to dismiss the need to be cautious, and when dealing with a virus as deadly as Ebola it is obviously better to err on the side of caution by quarantining anyone who may have been exposed. It is those who clean up after other Ebola patients that are most likely to contract Ebola. For that reason, I suspect that most cases of Ebola in the Western Hemisphere, now and for the foreseeable future, will be among direct healthcare workers. The rapid spread of the disease in West Africa is due to the fact that medical infrastructure is weak, so untrained people are forced to care for sick relatives and friends and thereby expose themselves to the disease. Even there, however, it is possible to stop the spread of Ebola (as in Nigeria) and give the sick a better chance to survive with some relatively simple measures (e.g. making sure the sick stay hydrated).

  10. SaintJude6 says:

    This is what really has me puzzled. Why is there absolutely no mention of “asymptomatic carriers”? My family once kept getting strep. Seven of us had been through antibiotics and then caught it again. As some of us were on our third round of antibiotics and had been throwing away toothbrushes every couple of days, disinfecting everything in sight, and being very careful about washing hands, writing names on cups, etc… our pediatrician decided to go ahead and run a culture on our toddler, who had absolutely no symptoms. He turned out to be an asymptomatic carrier. (We still joke about him being our typhoid Mary.) So if we know that some people can be exposed to Ebola and not get it, are they doing blood tests or just monitoring them for symptoms?

  11. SaintJude6 says:

    So I just did a quick google search on Ebola, asymptomatic carriers. Here is one example from the New York Times in 2000:
    The Ebola virus, which has caused deaths from high fever and bleeding in African outbreaks, can also infect without producing illness, according to a new finding by African and European scientists.

    The possibility of asymptomatic infection was only suggested in earlier studies, they said in last week’s issue of The Lancet, a medical journal published in London. Now they said they had documented such infections for the first time. They found that the Ebola virus could persist in the blood of asymptomatic infected individuals for two weeks after they were first exposed to an infected individual. How much longer the virus can persist is unknown.

    All outbreaks of Ebola have been controlled by standard infection control measures such as effective body disposal, destroying or sterilizing contaminated equipment and appropriate use of gloves. But if people can be carriers without showing symptoms, it means control might be more difficult.

    ”This degree of containment would be virtually impossible if symptom-free carriers posed a significant threat of infection,” Dr. Alan G. Baxter of Newtown, Australia, wrote in an editorial in the same issue of The Lancet.

  12. MWindsor says:

    Ok, it may be difficult to take seriously…I’ll grant you that. But what about the BBC.

    Everyone go Google this: BBC 2012 Ebola Airborne

    Read the November 15th article by Matt McGrath.

    Go to confession.

  13. Gerard Plourde says:

    First point – Fr. Z’s advice regarding the importance of regular Confession and preparation for an untimely death is paramount at all times. (“Therefore, stay awake for you know neither the day nor the hour.” Mt. 25:13)

    While I don’t want to minimize the need for vigilance regarding ebola and precautions to lessen the chances of transmission are prudent, it should be noted that the study cited concluded

    “If the same holds true for filoviruses, aerosol transmission is a greater threat in modern hospital or laboratory settings than it is in the natural climatic ranges of viruses. The route of infection or the degree of pulmonary involvement of the primary cases may also be an important factor to consider when evaluating the natural aerosol transmissibility of the filoviruses. While both parenteral and aerosol exposure to Ebola virus cause a systemic disease involving all organs, monkeys exposed to viral aerosols during our study developed strong immunoreactivity for Ebola virus anti- gen in airway epithelium, in oral and nasal secretions, and in bronchial and tracheobronchial lymphoid tissue.”(Article at 233.)

    In other words, while aerosol transmission can’t be ruled out, the danger is greatest where high concentrations of the virus occur, i.e. a laboratory or hospital setting. Further, it appears that transmission into the airway activates a more powerful immune response than transmission by contact.

  14. Mum26 says:

    Now may be the time to resurrect devotion to the 14 Holy Helpers:

  15. torch621 says:

    Why are we taking a website run by conspiracy loon extraordinaire Alex Jones seriously?

  16. tskrobola says:

    I spent a few hours reading the links from the article and listening to the interview of the Doctor and Alex Jones. I am a father of 10 children so I take this kind of thing VERY seriously.

    In the Reston example they did not establish the mode of transmission between rooms but there were numerous other ways that the virus could have been carried from room to room in that case that were not controlled.

    In the 1995 study, they squirted ebola-tainted aerosol spray right into the faces of monkeys using helmet-containment units. Virtually any virus or bacteria can be placed in an aerosol spray and transmitted to a new host in that fashion. In the case of ebola, however, for it to transmit from one monkey’s/person’s lung to another monkey/person, the virus would need to first bond with the lining of the lung tissue, then the virus would have to survive being expelled from the lungs at a high rate of speed through the air then successfully survive on another surface long enough to make it intact into the new host tissue.

    The citations/studies above provide no evidence that ebola has properties that make it transmissible between monkeys/humans through coughing/sneezing, and the study provided wasn’t even designed to demonstrate that.

    If ebola was transmissible between humans through the air, I’m pretty sure we’d know about it, because ebola would probably be at pandemic levels right now if that were the case.

    Now it could mutate into a form that is air-transmissible between humans, let’s pray that doesn’t happen, but in it’s current form ebola is deadly but treatable and can be contained with existing technology without disruption to society.

    Frankly, you should be more concerned about whatever strain of the flu will be around this year than ebola in my opinion.

  17. frahobbit says:

    USAMRIID has disabled all its search keys on its website.

  18. The Masked Chicken says:

    It ain’t science unless it’s replicated at least once.

    This really makes me mad, so I’m going to play the mad (angry) scientist for a moment. The problem with the Ebola virus going airborne (not the same thing as being made into an aerosol – there is a subtle difference, as aerosol refers to the size, airborne refers to the transport method), at lower temperatures, is that there is no theory proposed in these papers as to how this might happen (see, below, for an actual theory). Ebola virus is a filovirus, meaning that is has a long, slender (in this case, helical) filamentous structure, having a molecular weight of 3.82 x 10^6 Daltons (grams/mole). In order for something to become an airborne pathogen, two types of transport phenomena come into play without the presence of forcing (i.e., wind): diffusion and percolation. Diffusion is the process by which substances move from a high concentration gradient to a lower concentration gradient due to things like thermal agitation and random walks. It may be either an equilibrium or non-equilibrium process depending upon certain circumstances. In the simple equilibrium process the particles gradually spread out to cover the maximum volume consistent with other thermodynamic variables, such as temperature, chemical potential, etc. The process is covered by Fick’s Second Law of Diffusion in water or air:

    ?????/?t = Di ?^2????/?x^2

    where Di = Dx, Dy, Dz, respectively. D is the diffusion coefficient in units of length^2/time. Now it is known that the diffusion coefficient for most biological molecules, because they are so heavy, relatively speaking, is on the order of 10^-11 to 10^-10 m^2/sec in solution and about 10-8m^2/sec in air (generally, air coefficients are about 10,000 times large than solution coefficients), which is fairly slow. Fick’s Law assumes a relatively symmetric particle without orthotropic resistance in transport. A filamentous virus would show maximum transport when the virons all propagated along the axis of the virus and maximum resistance when they were aligned 90 degrees out of the plane. True propagation would be the time-averaged value of the two.

    If there are other particles in the air, such as water, the rate of diffusion drops, rapidly. This is a multi-component problem that uses the non-linear Onsager equation to solve, but this is difficult to do.

    If there is a fanning wind, then diffusion becomes a bulk convection problem which is much easier to solve: essentially, the particles move, approximately, at the speed and direction of the wind, for wind speed fast enough relative to particle mass and shape (which introduces some overall variation). This is a problem solved in introductory fluid dynamic classes.

    Ebola is a pretty light virus, as viruses go, but it is still massive compared to most aerosols. One would not expect very rapid diffusion in still air without a wind gradient. In general, the complete motion of an aerosol in space is determined by several transport phenomena studied in junior level fluid dynamic classes for engineers. In practice the governing equation taking into account diffusion, flow rate, Reynold’s numbers etc. is the Aerosol General Dynamics Equatiion (GDE):

    which must be approximated, because no known closed form solution exists.

    Once the particles are in the airway of the person, they are, again, covered by diffusion, but also percolation theory, which, as the name suggests, measure the probability of particles settling into a medium (think, lung saturation). Again, the theory is fairly complex.

    The point is that none of the cited papers address either mechanisms. In the cases cited, the aerosol was, essentially, squirted (okay, wafted) into the monkeys noses:

    “The potential of aerogenic infection by Ebola virus was established by using a head-only exposure aerosol system. Virus-containing droplets of 0.8-1.2 microns were generated and administered into the respiratory tract of rhesus monkeys via inhalation. Inhalation of viral doses as low as 400 plaque-forming units of virus caused a rapidly fatal disease in 4-5 days. The illness was clinically identical to that reported for parenteral virus inoculation, except for the occurrence of subcutaneous and venipuncture site bleeding and serosanguineous nasal discharge.” [From the abstract: Lethal Experimental Infections of Rhesus Monkeys by Aerosolized Ebola Virus]

    “Groups of cynomolgus macaques (cyno), rhesus macaques (rhesus), and African green monkeys (AGM) were challenged with target doses of 50 or 500 plaque-forming units (pfu) of aerosolized SUDV.” [From the abstract: A Characterization of Aerosolized Sudan Virus Infection in African Green Monkeys, Cynomologus Macaques and Rhesus Macaques]

    Now, Ebola, as well as the flu, are encapsulated viruses, which means that they have an external RNA membrane. In dessicated conditions, this membrane, eventually, ruptures, essentially, deactivating the virus. Why is the flu so much easier to catch? For one thing, the rate at which a particle settles in the air is dependent on its size. According to the review paper, Review of Aerosol Transmission of Influenza A Virus:

    “By definition, aerosols are suspensions in air (or in a gas) of solid or liquid particles, small enough that they remain airborne for prolonged periods because of their low settling velocity. For spherical particles of unit density, settling times (for a 3-m fall) for specific diameters are 10 s for 100 ?m, 4 min for 20 ?m, 17 min for 10 ?m, and 62 min for 5 ?m; particles with a diameter <3 ?m essentially do not settle. Settling times can be further affected by air turbulence (10,11)."

    Influenza A, which causes the common flu, is, usually, spherical in shape, whereas Ebola is helical, having a much larger surface area. Both are about 80 nanometers in size (.08 ?m diameter or .04 nm radius), so they, essentially, do not settle on their own. According to the paper, Influenza Virus Aerosols in Human Exhaled Breath: Particle Size, Culturability, and Effect of Surgical Masks:

    “We sought to determine the total number of viral RNA copies present in exhaled breath and cough aerosols, whether the RNA copies in fine particle aerosols represent infectious virus, and whether surgical facemasks reduce the amount of virus shed into aerosols by people infected with seasonal influenza viruses. We found that total viral copies detected by molecular methods were 8.8 times more numerous in fine (?5 µm) than in coarse (>5 µm) aerosol particles and that the fine particles from cases with the highest total number of viral RNA copies contained infectious virus.”

    A significant number of small-sized particles remain from any exhalation of flu material and this does not settle, making the air relatively dense with flu particles which will, then, diffuse or convect throughout the air. Here’s the catch: the flu virus is more contagious in cold weather than warm weather because (from the article, Influenza Virus Transmission Is Dependent on Relative Humidity and Temperature and paraphrased by the New York Times, Study Shows Why the Flu Likes Winter, By Gina Kolata, December 5, 2007):

    “Flu viruses are more stable in cold air, and low humidity also helps the virus particles remain in the air. That is because the viruses float in the air in little respiratory droplets, Dr. Palese said. When the air is humid, those droplets pick up water, grow larger and fall to the ground…It is unclear why infected animals released viruses for a longer time at lower temperatures. There was no difference in their immune response, but one possibility is that their upper airways are cooler, making the virus residing there more stable.”

    Flu is practically unknown in equatorial regions, because they are not airborne for very long until they become a nucleation site for water droplets that fall to the ground. Ebola is known in equatorial regions, but not as aerosols, for the same reason. Would Ebola become a persistent aerosol in colder weather? Here’s the difference between the flu and Ebola and why I don’t, yet, trust these studies: the shape of the flu virus is spherical; Ebola is helical and filamentous. The surface area of a sphere is 4 x pi x r^2, giving the typical flu virus 4 x 3.14 x .04 nm^2 = .02 nm^2, but the Ebola is a helix (approximated by a cylinder) and the radius is .04 nm and the length can vary from 1000 nm to 15, 000 nm, so the surface area is: 2 x pi x r^2 + 2 x pi x L. This means that the surface area can vary from 6280 nm^2 to 62, 800 nm^2, a whopping 314,000 to 3,140,000 times as much surface area as the flu virus. Thus, the amount of water needed to create a nucleation site for Ebola is much less, so much so that it would take extremely dry conditions, if not dessicated conditions (no water at all), much drier than for the flu, for it to stay airborne. Thus, I don’t believe these studies were done in anywhere near realistic conditions.

    The virus can mutate to become airborne and contagious in a manner similar to the flu, but evolution doesn’t happen that fast. As the commenter, Artifakt, mentioned in a recent Slashdot post on the New York doctor who has become infected with Ebola,

    “Some types of mutation are fantastically unlikely – by one account, Ebola would have to mutate into a form that only weighs about 20% or even 10% of what it now does, change from a long, twisted rod to something more like a sphere, and switch the conditions it actually grows under from inside the bloodstream to in the alveolar structures of the lungs to become the sort of threat some people are worried about. There are big differences between viruses frequently mutating and that mutation leading to fast evolutionary selection, but I’ve tried to explain that on Slashdot too many times to keep hammering at that particular type of ignorance – some people just need to sit down and read a whole good college textbook on Evolution. It may be somewhat reasonable to worry that some mutation in the direction of drug resistance is likely, especially if we don’t get this strain under control quickly, but some people are basically describing having a smallish frilled lizard sneak into the country on a piece of driftwood, and six months later, it’s stomping buildings flat and breathing radioactive plasma on Mothra, and those same people are too busy spreading rumors to learn anything at all. As they panic at the drop of a hat, people who are actual experts (and not just armchair biology hackers like me) are getting very afraid to say anything at all, because when they give an honest answer that shouldn’t cause panic, and might even be a bit reassuring, they expect to be misquoted as saying Ebola will make the Nemesis black hole wander into the inner solar system early and reverse all our magnetic poles…”

    So, calm down and go back to doing the real science that needs to be done. I’m not saying that Ebola might not go airborne, but the mechanisms by which viruses become airborne which we currently understand do not support Ebola becoming airborne, even in drier, winter conditions, because the amount of water in the air is still enough, relative to the large surface area of Ebola, to make it settle very quickly.

    The Chicken

  19. SKAY says:

    “The study also referred to the 1989 Ebola outbreak at a primate quarantine facility in Reston, Va., in which the virus rapidly spread between unconnected rooms.”
    Apparently they concluded that this particular strain of Ebola–Ebola Reston–was deadly only to the primates–and that it could have been airborne. The facility was eventually torn down.

    Some Doctors are pointing out that the incubation period could be longer than 21 days. We are
    sending 3000 -4000 troops to the Ebola hot zones. Have all of these people had adequate training
    with adequate equipment before being sent? Even some of our healthcare workers were not given either one we are finding out. (Thankfully nurses have been speaking up.) Will they all be quarantined when they arrive back in the US? Will they have actual contact with the sick Ebola patients. I have heard several different answers from those who are supposed to know.

    We continue to get confusing information from those in this administration who are supposed to be in charge. A little common sense from them would help.
    New Orleans is watching someone right now who has just come back from the area. I hope this turns out to be OK–and that this person is quarantined at least 21 days.
    StJude6 also brought up a valid point brought up in discussions I have seen about Ebola. asymtomatic carriers.
    I also had the experience of reoccurring strep throat with my two daughters. I suspected
    that one of their friends was the carrier because the rest of our family was put on medication
    just in case we were carriers. It did not solve the problem. It only was solved when we moved away from the area.

    It is interesting that the countries over in Africa who have stopped the disease from spreading
    and are now very proud of being Ebola free — had closed their borders.
    I am praying.

  20. Kerry says:

    Silver bullets from the Masked gallus!

    Nice shootin’ pardner.

  21. HeatherPA says:

    Regarding asymptomatic carriers, strep is a bacteria. I don’t think that a viral illness is able to be asymptomatically carried because of the virus’ structure and fragility, though I admit that I could be wrong as all heck about that. However, I have never heard of an asymptomatic flu carrier or the like. It is an interesting point to think about.

  22. MrTipsNZ says:

    I’m ( a biomedical scientist (albeit not in infectious disease) and tskrabola and the Masked Chicken above are pretty much on the money.

    Aerosols delivered to the mouth/nasal area (where its warm) are going to be infectious. The CDC has a bit of experimental info here ( and fluid contact is still the most important method.

    Also impt. to consider is that IF Ebola transmission mutates to an airborne method then it will likely have to trade-off infectious capacity for virulence. That is, changes in its protein coat required to sustain it in airborne form for hours or days may make it less lethal. SARS and swine flu are such cases.

    By all means we should be careful and pray as Fr Z says. Personally, I am more worried about ISIS and the damage spread by Cardinal Kaspar and co.

  23. Mike says:

    Irrespective of the general reliability of the source (which doesn’t happen to be on my top-50 list of information providers), it’s good to raise the issue. It’s also gratifying that multiple commenters have taken the trouble to walk us through the science.

    One struggles to think of another venue whose audience values charity over contempt enough to provide a haven for such a discussion. Thanks to Fr. Z for providing this one.

  24. Makemeaspark says:

    Thank you for your concern for us Father! Truly the heart of a pastor!

    That being said, I love the but get frustrated when he links Alex Jones information. Please take anything from Infowars with more than a skeptics eye. He says some very spurious things and cares not for the fallout. I know at least three mentally disturbed people who listen to him and he really exacerbates their condition!

    Please research anything from Infowars for the source material and even view that as suspect. I research any of his sources for ACTUAL credentials that are verifiable and from reputable universities. I also google his sources names to find out if they are being sued for anything.

  25. TrierloM says:

    Sorry about that one of the links was bad. that is better!

Comments are closed.