TexasCHLforum.com

Keith B wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

Keith B wrote:

gljjt wrote:

Keith B wrote:It is not easy to catch and you must have direct contact with the individual. The area this comes from has a very poor sanitation standards. Easily passed between people when they have no modern healthcare readily available. I am more worried about the storms coming Thursday and possibly getting struck by lightning.

Not quite accurate. Contact with body fluids is the method of transmission. The infected person doesn't have to be there, just the fluids.

Not something I am normally in contact with from those I don't know. No matter, you must have had some form of contact, it's not an airborn virus. You're not going to get it off of a toilet seat.

Not true, according to this medical paper:

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspect ... tion-ebola

We believe there is scientific and epidemiologic evidence that Ebola virus has the potential to be transmitted via infectious aerosol particles both near and at a distance from infected patients, which means that healthcare workers should be wearing respirators, not facemasks.1

This reflects an incorrect and outmoded understanding of infectious aerosols, which has been institutionalized in policies, language, culture, and approaches to infection control. We will address this below. Briefly, however, the important points are that virus-laden bodily fluids may be aerosolized and inhaled while a person is in proximity to an infectious person and that a wide range of particle sizes can be inhaled and deposited throughout the respiratory tract.

The paper goes into much greater detail than just the two quotes above.

And this one disputes it, so who is correct? http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-me ... hrough-air" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'd put my money on the University of Minnesota link and not the other blog link laden with entertainment 'news' and use of that F word by the blogger.

Keith B wrote:

Crossfire wrote:

Keith B wrote:

gljjt wrote:

Keith B wrote:It is not easy to catch and you must have direct contact with the individual. The area this comes from has a very poor sanitation standards. Easily passed between people when they have no modern healthcare readily available. I am more worried about the storms coming Thursday and possibly getting struck by lightning.

Not quite accurate. Contact with body fluids is the method of transmission. The infected person doesn't have to be there, just the fluids.

Not something I am normally in contact with from those I don't know. No matter, you must have had some form of contact, it's not an airborn virus. You're not going to get it off of a toilet seat.

No, but a person who is sick, and coughing or sneezing, is transmitting body fluids into the air. It is a virus, just like the cold or flu virus. I find it hard to believe that it cannot be transmitted the same way.

Not according to the studies http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-me ... hrough-air" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It depends on your definition of airborne. True airborne transmission, the virus itself airborne -no. Transmission via sneeze, the virus attached to a sneeze droplet, near another person, yes, possible.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottli ... -airborne/

Kind of the same argument as a .380 for self defense. Lots of folks say it is underpowered. But nobody volunteers to take a shot. Ebola, not transmitted by air in the true definition of airborne with respect to viruses. But I wouldn't want to be sneezed on!!!!

Keith B wrote:It is not easy to catch and you must have direct contact with the individual. The area this comes from has a very poor sanitation standards. Easily passed between people when they have no modern healthcare readily available. I am more worried about the storms coming Thursday and possibly getting struck by lightning.

Not quite accurate. Contact with body fluids is the method of transmission. The infected person doesn't have to be there, just the fluids.