We’re in the midst of the largest Ebola outbreak ever, according to epidemiologists. The outbreak is so bad that Liberian president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has called for the quarantine of entire communities in her country, going as far as to close all except three land-based border crossings.
Symptoms of this lethal disease include:
- Overall fatigue and weakness
- Sudden fever
- Severe headache
- Vomiting and diarrhea
- Muscle pain
- Internal and external bleeding
As you might expect, that last one – bleeding from your external orifices and internal organs — typically means the patient is past saving. Read the full list of symptoms here. Ebola has an incubation period of anywhere from two to 21 days and those infected become contagious once symptoms appear.
Why do Ebola outbreaks occur in Africa?
Ebola infections typically begin in areas that lie in close proximity to tropical rain forests. It’s here, in these remote regions, that people can inadvertently encounter chimpanzees, gorillas, forest antelope, and other indigenous mammals. Many outbreaks occur after these people have eaten meat from these animals.
Ebola spreads through direct contact with infected bodily fluids – everything from mucus to tears to sweat and saliva and, yes, semen and blood – which puts the general population in affected areas at risk. As of July 28, 2014, almost 700 people have died of Ebola, since the outbreak began in March of this year.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO) there is no cure for the disease and no viable prophylactic vaccine on the horizon. With a terrifying fatality rate of 90 percent, the only options we have of treating Ebola include stopgap measures of maintaining adequate blood pressure, keeping electrolytes in balance, and the astute treatment of any adjunct infections.
Health officials scrambled to stop the spread of the virus when an infected man, traveling from Liberia, entered Lagos, Nigeria. Unaware that he was infected, the man entered Nigeria on an airplane, delivering a grim reminder that the spread of this horrific disease is just a flight away from anywhere. Strict quarantine remains the most effective way of stopping the spread of Ebola.
Why would we willingly introduce this threat into the United States?
To date, our country has allowed entry to two infected Americans. These patients are receiving treatment at Atlanta’s Emory University Hospital. Was it a wise move to bring these people inside US borders? Some experts claim that Emory University Hospital represents one of the safest places to treat a virus like Ebola. These same experts assured Associated Press reporters that there is virtually zero threat that this deadly virus (remember, 90% fatality rate) can spread from the facility’s ultra high security isolation unit. They are also quick to mention that American healthcare professionals who risk their lives to help those overseas deserve the unparalleled treatment offered by American facilities.
A prominent physician from Johns Hopkins University and Hospital, expressed grave concerns, but first remarked that even with proper current treatment protocols, the mortality rate [of Ebola] is probably lower than reported. “Ebola is a terrifying disease. If you don’t treat it, close to 90 percent of people will die. A lot of people think that’s just the case in general, but in fact, with adequate treatment, you get closer to 50-60 percent survival rate.” Having said that, Dr. Ben Carson warns that bringing the disease back to the United States is not a good move. “I’m a little concerned that we’re bringing it back here. I think we have the ability to treat it in other places. The reason I would be concerned with bringing [patients back to the U.S.] is because it’s transmitted primarily through bodily fluids. …It can actually survive outside the host for several days at least.”
Carson suggests we send professionals to treat patients at the source. Due to the nature of the disease, just a small infraction in protocol could result in spread of the disease here, on our soil.
What’s the right answer? Are we bound to treat these patients on US soil simply because of their humanitarian efforts? Or would it be better to go to the source to deliver treatment? Rather than ask my typical question of, “What do you want to build today?”, I ask you: Ebola on our soil. Right or wrong?