What is your risk of contracting Ebola?

[MineralMan]

Unless you are actively involved in caring for patients with the disease, your risk is as close to zero as it can be. If you are not in Dallas, or the hospital in Nebraska, your risk is even lower. If you want to minimize your risk even more, avoid air travel and stay away from people who have symptoms of illness. Stay away from hospitals, clinics, etc.

If you shop, go at hours when few people are in the stores. Most areas have 24-hour supermarkets, for example. Shop at 3 AM. Wash your hands every time you touch anything that's not in your home - anything others may have touched. Don't handle anything, including mail, newspapers, etc. without thoroughly disinfecting them.

Sound stupid? Well, yes, it is stupid. It's hard to catch Ebola. There are exactly two cases in the United States. Those who have been in contact with those people have been told to monitor themselves for any symptoms. Since it's a deadly disease, you can be sure that they are doing that, almost in a panicky way.

Your risk and my risk, at this time, is zero, or as close to zero as you can imagine. Your risk of dying from hundreds of other causes is far, far higher. Your chance of winning the Lotto is much higher than your chance of ever having Ebola in your lifetime.

If there is an outbreak, that may be a different thing. There is no outbreak. There are two patients in the U.S.

So, go buy a lottery ticket. Who knows, you might catch the right numbers. Someone always does, eventually.

[bigwillq]

1. My risk is probably low.

Very low.

[MineralMan]

3. I guarantee it. You're not going to get Ebola.

Nobody on DU will get Ebola. There are so many other things to worry about that Ebola shouldn't be a personal worry for anyone except health care workers who are working somewhere where there is a case.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

10. I work in a hospital, and I'm sure other DUers do as well.

Nobody on DU will get Ebola.

Thank you, Dr. MineralMan.

[Bragi]

21. What if it's a smarter virus?

My incomplete understanding of viruses is that they constantly redesign themselves through mutation so as to find ways to replicate themselves in as many hosts as possible, which they then kill.

This makes me wonder if the Ebola virus has newly evolved in some vague manner that will allow it now and in the future to infect and kill off huge numbers of health care workers, after which it will be able to more easily kill the rest of us.

I know, that sounds crazy. But at minimum, the cost of containing the spread of this deadly virus has to be absorbed by the global health system, which takes real resources away from other, more deadly public health threats.

So might we now have a smartened-up Ebola virus that is poised to take out a big chunk of humanity?

Hah, you say!

I say: interesting times.

[MineralMan]

26. No virus has a brain. It's impossible for a virus to be smart.

As for evolving, yes, viruses evolve all the time. So far, none of that type of virus has ever evolved to be transmitted in any way other than the way such viruses are transmitted, so the risk remains the same. It already has a high lethality rate. If it were easy to get, it would be a horrible thing. It's nature, though, doesn't lend itself to easy transmissibility, and that nature isn't going to change.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

28. Ebola is a single molecule virus ...

It doesn't reassemble like HIV.

[FLPanhandle]

2. Zero.

On the list of things to worry about it's about at the bottom next to being killed by Big Foot.

[MineralMan]

5. As close to zero as anything can be, really.

I'd keep an eye out for meteorites, though. You could get killed by one. It has happened.

[Rex]

4. I'm not incredibly far from Dallas.

But I would say zero, unless there is an outbreak.

[MineralMan]

6. Yup. Even in Dallas, itself, the risk is exceedingly small.

Now, if you go visit someone in that particular hospital, you might have a 1 in 10,000 risk. Probably not even that high, really.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

7. Sorry, I'll have read responses later

I'm busy at the moment, soaking my mail in Lysol.

[etherealtruth]

8. LOL

[MineralMan]

11. There you go.

Double glove before opening it, too, and you should be OK.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

16. Absolutely!

And just to be safe, I'll be reading the disinfected mail while soaking in a bleach bath.

[MineralMan]

35. Good move.

[still_one]

9. You don't understand, the media needs to sell papers. Oh for the good old days when we had terror

Alert colors

[MineralMan]

14. Oh, I understand perfectly well.

Creating panic makes money.

Go search on Amazon for biohazard protection products. It's great for the prepper supply manufacturers.

[still_one]

45. I knew you would understand

[kestrel91316]

12. Virtually zero. If we get a case here, it goes up a tad. People in this town would be really

terrible at obeying the rules of isolation. Just sayin'.

[gratuitous]

13. 200%!

That's what I've heard, at least. I mean, the people telling me this are the same ones who say that anthropogenic climate change is totally uncertain, so, you know, they're, like, scientifical.

[MineralMan]

15. I know. It's even worse if you get it twice, I hear.

[Adsos Letter]

48. Even worse if you get it twice at the same time!!!11!

[ileus]

17. I just come from a patient room.

mrsa is my biggest worry...


ebola may be eventually but for now not so much, of course that could change in a month or three. Time will tell...

[WinkyDink]

18. I'm rather counting on 0%. (Doesn't mean I can't discuss the topic of Ebola in the U.S.)

[joeglow3]

19. My wife occasionally works at UNMC. What are my chances?

[MineralMan]

22. Will she be in contact with the Ebola patient there?

If not, your chances are slim of ever encountering Ebola. I'm assuming that you're talking about the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Their Ebola facilities are isolated from the rest of the hospital. If that's not the facility you're talking about, your risk is zero. Even there, it's close to that unless you're on the care team for that patient.

[Le Taz Hot]

20. No cases in California yet

but if there are, I'm screwed. I go to people's houses for my job and am in close contact with family members. As long as it stays out of California I'm cool.

[MineralMan]

24. Which people's houses? California has a helluva lot of houses, last I noticed.

Your odds of being at one where Ebola is present would be virtually nil. If a case does show up there, I'm sure you'll be among the first to know about it. Stay away from that person's house, though. That would be my advice.

[Le Taz Hot]

56. I understand that the odds are great

that I come across a case, but it's not impossible.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

23. i have a far bigger risk of dying from just about everything else

[MineralMan]

25. Well, we will all die of something. That's guaranteed.

Life is 100% fatal. I can pretty much guarantee that neither your nor I will die of Ebola, though. At age 69, as the saying goes, "I could go any time."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. I'm still trying to get past the earth shattering catastrophe of the Y2K bug.

Did I miss it?

[MineralMan]

29. No. Y2K happened. We all died.

I thought everyone knew that. The thing is, we were already in Hell, so there was no place to go.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Thank God for Parallel Universes in that case.

[MineralMan]

33. Indeed. I'm convinced, though, that the universe I inhabit

is somewhat skewed from the one you're in. Diverging lines never meet.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. Nice scenery here in my corner of the universe.

Looks a lot like SW Washington.

[MineralMan]

47. That's a beautiful place.

Enjoy the view!

[logosoco]

63. Ah! That explains it! And I don't even believe in hell!

I'm not worried about getting ebola. I do feel for those in Africa, very much.

I think the thing that stands out to me about this is that we look like we got caught with our pants down, in a sense. Protocols at the airports and emergency rooms are not perhaps like we would expect.
This, I can understand. We are just human, and many of us are very over worked. But I don't think we can stand up now and presume that we can deal with some "crazy" group in the middle east.
Let's just focus on peace and washing our hands!

[PowerToThePeople]

73. We did not die in y2k, Bush got the Presidency

Death and hell would have been much more desirable than what occurred because of y2k and shrub.

[FLPanhandle]

32. Time to move on to the Mayan end of the world prediction

Pretty sure we all died during that one...

[MineralMan]

36. Then, too. We're now all part of the Zombie Universe.

We just don't know it. Fun, huh?

[customerserviceguy]

31. Probably about the same as having my head cut off by a terrorist

But that doesn't mean that people don't worry about either of those things happening to somebody else.

I have to wonder what goes on in the minds of the mushy middle, those who don't decide who to vote for until the weekend before the election. Sadly, those underinformed voters are often the ones who swing elections, and they vote more out of fear than of confidence.

They've gotta be pretty freaked out right now, and we still have a couple more weeks to go that can see other bombshell headlines. As we've seen with terrorism, they'll reluctantly vote for the party that makes them less scared.

[MineralMan]

34. Well, I haven't noticed all that many people who are really worried

about the people where Ebola is already prevalent. Most people appear to be worried about their own lives. I say they needn't worry about that. Don't Worry; Be Happy!

[customerserviceguy]

43. Again, these are the folks

who are not particularly political, and they probably make a practice of avoiding people on both ends of the spectrum, since they know they're poorly informed about current events, and would not be very effective in refuting anything.

The sad thing is, some of them will be in a voting booth on Election Day, and while they probably think that politics accomplishes nothing, they will have to make a gut decision if they choose to be in that polling place. We'll see how they decide.

I find that it would be prudent of the President and the Democratic members of Congress to at least give the appearance of trying to do everything they can, like a travel ban, rather than just let a bunch of scientists get on the talking heads shows. While these learned people probably know way more than the rest of us, they're not always terribly articulate outside of a science conference, and they don't have the political skills to say things in a way that inspires a lot of confidence. The gotcha news media that is accustomed to chewing up and spitting out Washington insiders really knows how to manipulate a 'geek' on occasion.

[MineralMan]

37. How many of the people who are very concerned about the risk

of Ebola have failed to get their flu shot, I wonder? Folks iz funny!

[LisaL]

39. Depends on how many people are running infected in Dallas.

[MineralMan]

40. Is that what it depends on? I'd say it depends more on

whether exposed people who develop symptoms seek immediate health care. My guess is that they will. They're probably all frightened as hell already. What would you do? I think I'd avoid contact with others and take myself right to the hospital the moment I noticed any symptoms.

[HereSince1628]

41. My risk today doesn't preclude a change in that risk tomorrow or in a week, month, etc.

I would be very surprised if my risk today is not EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE RELATIVES OF Thomas Duncan,...at least until the prepatent Duncan showed up at their door.

[MineralMan]

42. Do you have relatives who live in one of the three

countries where there are outbreaks? If not, why would anyone show up at your door? I live in St. Paul, MN. Here and in Minneapolis, there are 20,000 or so Liberian immigrants. There's a family of Liberian immigrants in the next block on the street where I live. And yet, I'm not worried about that.

I have no idea where you might be, though, or who lives near you.

[HereSince1628]

44. My point is RISK CHANGES with changing circumstance...but yes

the SO participates in programs that involve travel and exchange of international students to countries in the region of the African epidemic.

I think our risks are low, at least today.

But -that c.o.u.l.d. change.

While the risk today, is very very low, It's rather overly simplistic to think the risk that exists today will be the risk that will exist in the future.

People needn't panic, I'm not promoting panic.

But it is a very slow form of thinking that supposes that the risk you face today cannot change and that the reassurance you have today cannot fail you in the future.

[MineralMan]

46. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

Yesterday's over, today will soon be tomorrow, and tomorrow hasn't arrived yet. I rarely deal with speculative thinking. I deal with things as they are, instead. So far, there's no real risk.

[HereSince1628]

49. Actually that is black and white thinking

and its value hangs on the meaning of 'real' which I suppose is meant to discredit a very small but non zero risk.

The risk is certainly very very very low for most Americans, but the uncondititioned risk is now ACTUALLY NOT ZERO. We really DO have at least one confirmed case of transmission in the US. So it's 1 in 340 million or so. VERY VERY small...but non-zero.

If the conditioned risk is considered, Yes, it appears much much much much more likely among family and caregivers of ebola victims. I wouldn't argue otherwise

But, really, it's impossible to think that some Americans will ABSOLUTELY NOT become surprised family and caregivers to ebola sticken relatives or guests, when the reality has been shown to us...some Americans ARE family and caregivers to ebola stricken relatives/guests, etc.

[SheilaT]

52. 1 in 340 is considerably less than the odds of winning the Powerball,

which, according to a quick internet search, is 1 in 175.2 million.

I might reconsider my usual stance of not buying lottery tickets.

[HereSince1628]

53. Yes, but I think the important part of what I said is RISK CAN CHANGE!!!!!!!!!

and it can change with surprising speed.

Do you think the risk of the significant other of the infected nurse WAS anything other than exactly what YOUR risk is?

No it wasn't.

But she got exposed at work. AND SUDDENLY, in virtually the time it takes for AN ELISA TEST...his risk became something very very different.

I'm not promoting panic, but I think it is pretty slow thinking (that btw is THE definition of STUPID) to think that a person's risk isn't subject to sudden and unexpected change.

[SheilaT]

55. Depending on what that nurse and her significant other

did together AFTER the nurse became symptomatic. That would greatly alter the risk.

[HereSince1628]

58. You don't get the point I'm trying to make.

She probably had the exact same risk as you or I do today, and that risk is probably exactly the same as the relatives of Thomas Duncan...before he returned to the US.

Once Duncan was symptomatic in the presence of his relatives, THEIR RISK CHANGED DRAMATICALLY.

Once the nurse had to care for Duncan HER RISK CHANGED DRAMATICALLY.

Risk really isn't a constant. It would be slow thinking (i.e. STUPID!) to not realize that RISK CHANGES AS CIRCUMSTANCE CHANGES.

The unconditioned risk is very very very small...but non-zero

We await with great hopes information that says the risk to co-habitants is very very low in the US. But we don't have that yet.

The conditioned risk of a hospital staff now looks something more than 1 in 200.

I really do understand the intent of Mineralman's post...support the idea risk is low. But people CAN'T think that risks faced today will be risks faced tomorrow.

FACE IT! SHIT HAPPENS, and vomitis, and contamination of surfaces, and transmission of disease.

[SheilaT]

72. Maybe we really are saying the same thing, but

approaching it so differently it seems like we are disagreeing.

I understand that risk changes. BUT, for about 340 million people in this country the risk of getting Ebola is effectively zero. Yes, it is greater, far greater, for someone in direct contact with a symptomatic Ebola victim. And while I don't want to seem callous about the possibility this nurse will die, or the small although real possibility someone else will get the disease, I still get back to the point that the odds of contracting it are extremely low for the vast majority of people.

[ozone_man]

65. Wily Coyote said that too.

So far, so good!

[MineralMan]

67. So did Jesus, if you believe the Bible.

Matthew 6:34, I believe.

[ozone_man]

69. What did he say?

I don't know scripture or believe in the bible.

I think the point HereSince1628 is making is that risk can change. What may not seem like an issue for the U.S. could change if, for example, the virus mutates to become airborne infectious.

[MineralMan]

70. The title is a direct quote.

[BlindTiresias]

50. At the moment, yes

But I don't think most people are worried about right now, they are worried about the uncontrolled epidemic spilling out, which it absolutely will given enough new incidents and enough time. If there are a series of outbreaks in south or central america you can basically forget about effective containment via contact tracing, for example. If the situation in West Africa deteriorates to the point where commercial flights effectively cease and people are escaping via other means, you can forget about effective contact tracing.

[GeorgeGist]

51. Handy chart ...

[MineralMan]

60. +1000

[sadoldgirl]

54. The fear factor always seems to work

for those, who use it for political purposes. EBOLA! Be afraid! ISIS is coming! Be very, very afraid!!

Thus I think I seem to have to get Ebola, and then

my head will be chopped off by ISIS, which means I don't have to suffer too much of the pain.

Is that how it is supposed to work?

[Jamastiene]

57. My risk is very low, thankfully.

That is one advantage to living in the middle of bumfuckt nowhere; very low risk of bleeding from the eyeballs and hemorrhaging internally from Ebola. Every once in a while, there is a positive to living in bumfuckt.

[obxhead]

59. All great ideas to avoid another deadly illness though.

The flu is coming. Who knows how bad it will be this year.

[MineralMan]

61. True.Get your flu shot.

That's my advice.

[obxhead]

68. I never have.

However, I just moved a 1000 miles from my home for the last 25 years. New weather, new people, lots of change.

I think I'll get my first flu shot this weekend.

[LiberalArkie]

62. Maybe some good will come out of it, like people washing their hands after using the bathroom.

Nah

[LeftInTX]

64. Zero - but I'm concerned about other people

Will this epidemic ever slow down in Africa?
Will it become pandemic?
Will it become epidemic in the US? (Kinda doubt it, but who knows)**
How will it effect healthcare workers and our healthcare system?
How can healthcare workers and others exposed better protect themselves?
Where is Flight 370? (oops that's another worry)
etc. etc.

** If it becomes an epidemic in the US, then I might worry

My dad used to say to my mom: You just gotta have something to worry about or you go crazy.

[MineralMan]

66. Well, there are serious efforts to improve

health facilities in west Africa ongoing. We're sending military engineers an others to help. Probably we should have done this earlier.

It's already a serious problem in some places, if not quite epidemic.

It's very unlikely to even become an outbreak problem here, and protocols here will improve quickly.

Five or ten years from now, it will probably flare up again, as it has in the past. A vaccine may be developed, but it won't be a priority, because there's no money in it.

[PowerToThePeople]

71. Over time it will exponentially increase

This is just the beginning.

[FLPanhandle]

75. or it will be contained and die out.

Besides it's not airborne and will never be a killer like the common flu or any mosquito borne illness.

Once the newness wears off and media moves on to the next scary thing, it'll be a footnote.

[Zorra]

74. I don't know, and neither do you. nt

[Mister Nightowl]

76. FOX says I've already got it

[MrMickeysMom]

77. I don't know, MM… and if your point was to ease fears, nice try...

But, I work in a clinic and know a little something about infection control methods, who is likely to use and not use them per protocol. Even an outpatient clinic where real people come with family members in tow can be seen as high risk. Multiply this scenario across the U.S, and the odds are that if we don't work on a global scale to curtail the spread of this virus, these figures of yours won't be right. It will because we are sloppy.

Staying away from hospitals and clinics are a good idea, unless you find yourself in one. From that point, you can only hope that training and vigilance keep health care workers from increasing these statistics.

Oh, and you can be sure that health care workers can be under-managed and poorly trained. Count on it.

[TexasTowelie]

78. Okay, my odds have gone up.

I live with my brother who is a respiratory therapist. He works with a doctor who also works at Texas Presbyterian in Dallas. My brother had some type of virus this weekend and my own immune is compromised since I'm diabetic and I live in close quarters with my brother. O wise Mineral Man--what is my risk?