The Ebola virus exists in certain animal species found in an impoverished region of Africa. On rare occasions a human is infected by an animal carrying the virus leading to an outbreak of the disease. Almost everyone who lives in this region is black, thus most of the victims are black.
The Ebola virus exists in certain animal species found in an impoverished region of Africa. On rare occasions a human is infected by an animal carrying the virus leading to an outbreak of the disease. Almost everyone who lives in this region is black, thus most of the victims are black.
I get the "correlation isn't causation" bit, but how would we know if it were race-linked or not? Aren't there diseases that are more prevalent in certain ethnic populations, including blacks?
You're looking for an answer to a question that already has an answer.
"Why is it that Ebola outbreaks tend to affect black people more than other people?" The two posts you quoted both give explanations for that. The first is clearly a meaningful affect*, while the second pretty much explains the data that you want explained.
Is it possible that there's some other factor that could influence the spread of the disease? Sure, but there's no reason to believe so at present.
*What I mean by this is that once there is an outbreak this affect can impact how the disease spreads and influences questions of why it doesn't tend to spread outside of Africa.
Correa Neto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2003
- Messages
- 8,548
I have not doubt some slums are much worse than Rocinha. Its undeaniable. Not just slums; here in Brazil I've been to villages with worse conditions. Sure, not as bad as the example you cited.
These places, all around the third world (note not all of them are officially considered as slums) are ticking bombs for several types of tragedies. People die there from diseases that can be prevented, cured or at least contained; quite often they don't even enter in the official statistics. The conditions of slums facilitate transmittion of all sorts of diseases and make the fight against them rather difficult. Ebola, again, has a high casuality rate. Its a terrible disease; as most if not all diseases, the poorest people are their preferential targets.
Add corruption, inneficcient governments, poor education, not enough medical resources, local crime and warlords, certain religious practices, civil wars and you may have the perfect storm brewing.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
In fact economic development, in the form of the spread of agriculture and mining, may have triggered this and previous epidemics by encroaching on the habitats of animals living with the virus.
Yes, though they're generally directly genetically linked (e.g. Tay–Sachs, sickle-cell anemia, cystic fibrosis).
madurobob
Philosopher
Well, not necessarily racial, but there are cases of contagious diseases impacting certain groups of people far more than others. For instance smallpox and American Indians. But, thats mostly due to populations not building up an immunity over the years due to lack of exposure. Not quite the case w/ebola
ETA: not that I think this is a valid scenario here w/ebola, just that thats the best I could guess at the query about a racial component.
Last edited:
When smallpox hit a European village, older members of the community that had survived the last epidemic could take care of the sick. But in a Native American village where smallpox had never been, nobody would be healthy enough to take care of themselves or others. Villages that had missionaries had good survival rates, because the missionaries mostly had immunity and could take care of the villagers.
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,955
Sequence-Based Human Leukocyte Antigen—B Typing of Patients Infected with Ebola Virus in Uganda in 2000: Identification of Alleles Associated with Fatal and Nonfatal Disease Outcomes
At this point, the studies of this or other mutations that have an impact on ebola have not been done.
Whether these genetic differences are more common in one ethnic group than another, putting them at more risk, it would still depend on if you had that specific mutation, not necessarily just because you were in the ethnic group it was more common in.
At this point, the studies of this or other mutations that have an impact on ebola have not been done.
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2011
- Messages
- 12,761
Does this have any meaning? From what I know about Ebola people might as well be kept isolated - they may die, but wouldn't spread the virus, either.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
They weren't been quarantined, just hidden from medical staff. No treatment (hence a significantly worse chance of surviving). No disinfection of their surroundings (thus potentially spreading the disease) and ideal conditions to infect others. Plus heathcare workers won't know who else could be infected.
- A WHO staffer in Sierre Leone has been infected, disrupting laboratory testing for potential infections. The Canadian team operating there has also been evacuated. The infected person has been evacuated to Hamburg.
- The outbreak in Nigeria appears to be contained.
- Six travellers have been isolated in New Dehli over possible Ebola infection. A seventh remains in quarantine in Mumbai. 65 other Indians fleeing from the epidemic have been passed.
Why do risky stuff like that when you can send a cure via phone?
http://www.emergencydr.org/blog/2014/08/17/ebola/
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
I'm not generally in favour of capital punishment but I'm willing to make an exception for scum like that.
madurobob
Philosopher
Wasn't there a link a few weeks ago to a homeopath website detailing how to properly make a homeopathic ebola cure. This was supposedly a great public service being offered by the homeopath. The post was taken down not because it would have been ineffective, but because it began with acquiring some of the active virus to then be succussed. Or maybe it was rattlesnake venon, I don't know.
I guess they figured encouraging people to handle the ebola virus was maybe a bad idea?
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 12,331
Not if the virus is deliberately used as a bioweapon.
It takes little imagination to see how this might be done using a living carrier. (Who might be neither asked nor informed).
A high school level biolab and some water pistols would be about all they would need.
Even if actual casualty count was low, the economic chaos and resultant security escalation would be significant. All for the price of an air ticket.
Remember, the aim of terrorists is terror.
Last edited:
Correa Neto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2003
- Messages
- 8,548
^That was one of the things I meant by writing this:
"There are also other rather dire possibilities, even for first worlders."
Biological weapons are old. Corpses of plague victims catapulted over the walls of cities during siedes, for example.
Remember, 21 days incubation. Time enough for the "living bomb" to be deployed virtually anywhere in the world. You actually don't even need to have placed contaminated people at your target. All it takes to cause a mess is to say you did it. Lots of money will be wasted trying to locating and containing them and the possible outcomes. Even if its just a lie.
It can be even worse - lie one, two, three times. When people will no longer care about it, do it.
"There are also other rather dire possibilities, even for first worlders."
Biological weapons are old. Corpses of plague victims catapulted over the walls of cities during siedes, for example.
Remember, 21 days incubation. Time enough for the "living bomb" to be deployed virtually anywhere in the world. You actually don't even need to have placed contaminated people at your target. All it takes to cause a mess is to say you did it. Lots of money will be wasted trying to locating and containing them and the possible outcomes. Even if its just a lie.
It can be even worse - lie one, two, three times. When people will no longer care about it, do it.
Last edited:
Correa Neto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2003
- Messages
- 8,548
Considering most people live nowadays in cities, only if in rats and pigeons. Again, all it takes to make a mess is to say it was done. Even if very few people actually end up believing, governments will have to spend money, time, resources to check it all.
And I wrote "siedes" instead of "sieges". I refuse to acept I need glasses.
And I wrote "siedes" instead of "sieges". I refuse to acept I need glasses.
Frozenwolf150
Formerly SilentKnight
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,134
The homeopaths would need to have an actual working ebola cure first, before they dilute it a billion-fold. Of course, no such thing exists.
Brian-M
Daydreamer
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2008
- Messages
- 8,044
To be fair, the site clearly states that it's not meant to be used as a substitute for medical treatment. Plus they aren't charging money for it either.
From that link:
Do not use eRemedies in absence of other supportive measures. Most importantly, if there are symptoms, see a doctor or health care worker! It is important to get enough fluids orally, but intravenous fluids are also necessary. Bedrest is necessary. Hygiene must be maintained regarding vomiting and diarrhea.
eRemedies are not treatment to be used as a substitute for full supportive care! It is merely one of several natural supportive things that can be done to enhance the bodys healing powers.
eRemedies are not treatment to be used as a substitute for full supportive care! It is merely one of several natural supportive things that can be done to enhance the bodys healing powers.
So it probably isn't doing any harm, and they aren't ripping anyone off.
No. Homeopathy "works" on the concept of like-cures-like, so what they'd actually need is a substance that causes similar symptoms to ebola, but isn't actually ebola.