Thursday, August 16, 2018

Keep An Occasional Eye On This One...

We gave little notice to the last Ebola outbreak, which proved to be justified, because it was dealt with rather swiftly, and largely contained in short order (at least by Wakanda standards).

But literally days after that outbreak was contained, another one (and not the same one) has cropped up in a section of Congo that's a double-whammy:
Highly populated, and so war-torn dangerous there is minimal ability for anyone to get a handle on containing the virus.

Imagine trying to fight a gasoline refinery fire in Detroit.
During a (Some) Black Lives Matter riot.

(EBOLAVILLE) The latest Ebola epidemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is shaping up to be the most dangerous and difficult test of the world’s ability to contain the disease since the catastrophic West African outbreak in 2014 and 2015.
Like an outbreak earlier this year, in the western part of the country, cases have been reported across multiple locations, disease transmission is taking place in cities where hundreds of thousands of people live, and there’s the potential for the virus to spread across several international borders.
But this outbreak is occurring in a part of the Congo that has long been a conflict zone, with over 1 million displaced people, scores of armed combatant groups, and “red zones” where outsiders hoping to contain a deadly disease may not be able to travel.
The outbreak was declared in North Kivu on Aug. 1, a week after the previous epidemic was deemed contained. Genetic analysis of viruses from the two show that while they are caused by the same species of ebola viruses, Ebola Zaire, they are not linked.
Two weeks into this outbreak, the toll has already surpassed that of the earlier epidemic, which was centered around Bikoro, near DRC’s western border. There were 54 cases and 33 deaths over roughly four months in the Bikoro outbreak. As of Tuesday, there were 73 confirmed and probable cases and 43 deaths in North Kivu, and the case count is rising steadily.
North Kivu is in northeastern Congo, near the border with Uganda and Rwanda. It’s the country’s most populous province, with 8 million people. It is also its most dangerous.
Under a scoring system used by the U.N. to determine the level of risk for its personnel in conflict zones, North Kivu is at level 4. Level 5 means the U.N. must evacuate; it is simply too perilous to be present.
Remember two things:
1) 34 doublings to go from nobody to everybody. (This one is now between 6 and 7.)
That's just basic Epidemic Math.

2) In fifteen days, this outbreak has surpassed what the last one did in four months.
Which underlines:
a) virulence
b) transmissibility in this region
c) difficulty of doing what's necessary to halt the spread

It's still small potatoes, but moving roughly eight times faster than the last outbreak means it bears some scrutiny.

If it gets to a population center/starts hurdling international borders, we're off to the races again like it's 2014.

The only saving grace is that this time around we don't have an illegal alien Muslim idiot riding shotgun on the anti-apocalypse circus.

Panic is never a good idea.
Calm, rational forethought is always a good idea.
Act accordingly.
Think happy thoughts, and hopefully MSF/WHO manage to corral this before gets away from them, and it turns into another wildfire sh*tshow.

Dealing with a biblically epic pandemic may very well be the last thing on your preparedness things-to-do, for good and prudent reasons.
But it should still be on the list.

I'll be very happy not to have to do another round of coverage of the Insane Clown Posse.


WIKIPEDIA page link for this outbreak.
Bonus fact to drive the point home:

"The area in question, North Kivu, is also currently in the middle of the Kivu Conflict, a military conflict with thousands of displaced refugees. The affected areas host over one million displaced people and shares borders with Rwanda and Uganda, with frequent cross border movement due to trade activities. The prolonged humanitarian crisis and deterioration of the security situation is expected to affect any response to the outbreak.
There are about 70 armed military groups in North Kivu. The armed fighting has displaced thousands of individuals." - Wikipedia

Because what you really want is an area crawling with teenagers with AK-47s, and refugee camps cram-packed with potential infectees, right next to two international borders.

And the virus, so far in this outbreak, is enjoying an approximate 80% mortality rate.

What could possibly go wrong...?


Anonymous said...

Napalm works.

Aesop said...

Tell that to the people of Dallas.

Also, you don't have enough for an entire continent.

JJ said...

As a resident of DFW area I’d rather have common sense restrictions on traveling from Ebola stricken areas than to be napalmed!

Unfortunately I can see how this is going to play out. The President issues Constitutional executive orders, the progressive socialists and the globalists from both parties goes bonkers yet again, an Obummer appointed federal judge issues an injunction preventing the lawful orders from being enforced and then we start dealing with Ebola cases in the US again.

We’re probably no better prepared for an outbreak this time as we were in 2014.

Night driver said...

But we LOOK so much better prepared.


Anonymous said...

If you believe the figures that are published by the African countries, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.

The African politicians will deliberately lie about numbers and together with the coverage of the country be trained medical personnel being very sparse, the true numbers will be several magnitudes larger. Much of the country will have zero independent reporters or any sort of infrastructure to identify, collect data and/or get the information out.

That won't stop the infected people concerned from trying (as JJ pointed out in a comment above) to jump on an aircraft and come to the West for medical treatment. A pandemic is defnintlely on the cards.

Phil B

Reltney McFee said...

Wasn't it Pres Andrew Jackson who said something like, "The Chief Justice has issued his ruling. Let him enforce it." ?

Aesop said...


Seriously, man, were you not here in 2014 when I beat the African reports of that epidemic like a rented mule, about seven times a week, for three months...?
Go back to oh, Sept/Oct/November of that year.
The "official fudge factor" was to take all African-supplied numbers and multiply them X3.
They still don't know how many actual deaths there were; entire villages just walked out into the jungle to die.

The serious lying doesn't start at the beginning, when they discover it.
It starts when it becomes apparent they have no control of the situation, let alone a grasp of it.

The numbers, at this point, are MSF/WHO numbers as much as anything.

Once you get Mr. Kaqbanga involved, and he has to take his shoes off to get numbers above ten, that's when the fun begins.

As for an actual by-the-book quarantine, I was jumping up and down for that level of sanity, in vain, from anybody responsible, for six months.

It's one of the reasons took a leave of absence and walked off my job for a number of months, at the time.
I had no desire to be a canary in that coal mine.

Cederq said...

Crap that 'n" wasn't suppose to be published. Same reason I got out of nursing back in 2000 Aesop, I saw the writing on the wall and wanted no part of being infected with foreign viruses and be that canary in that mine. I still keep my skills and techniques and knowledge current. I stay out of hospitals and clinics.

Aesop said...

I fixed that "n" problem for you.

Anonymous said...

Your writing in 14 was taken to herart then and has been on the list subsequently. What this will do is move the water-storage augments up on the procurement list.

The Gray Man said...

Guess I have to start asking "have you traveled to Africa or been around anyone who has?" in the ER again, and actually listening more closely to the answer.

Anonymous said...

Bill Burr on Ebola and Michelle Obama. Very funny!

"I don't know much about Ebola... other than if you get it you apparently have an unbelievable urge to go to the airport."

Anonymous said...

"Nuke the entire site from orbit,its the only way to be sure"

Linda Fox said...

Incorrect - REALLY incorrect.

But, funny.

I do happen to agree with him about the expanding role of the First Ladies. Ridiculous! Spouses shouldn't show up at the job, and have anything to say about how the WORKER does it.

Male or female.