Ebola question. (possibly dumb).

[DanTex]

Why can't they test people for Ebola before they start showing symptoms? If the Ebola is in their system, wouldn't the test show up positive anyway? Does the test rely on antibodies that don't show up immediately, or something like that?

[marym625]

1. article answering

http://www.vox.com/2014/10/3/6891297/why-airport-testing-wont-stop-ebola-from-coming-to-the-us

[DanTex]

2. Thanks. So it looks like during the incubation period there's not enough ebola

in the bloodstream to detect. It seems like a good thing to do would be to develop a more sensitive test.

[Peacetrain]

3. Good chance there would be progress on that .. if the congress had not cut research so deeply

and hopefully there is.. maybe Canada is working on this.. not a dumb question at all.. actually very thought provoking..

[DanTex]

5. I wonder if ebola were used to cheat in sports, if they'd have a test by now.

[FSogol]

7. I doubt it. Usually when someone in sports gets caught it is because masking agents show up,

not the performance enhancing drugs. See Barry Bonds and Chris Davis.

[DanTex]

9. I wasn't aware that Barry Bonds got popped by the masking agent.

I'm most familiar with PED use and testing in cycling, there when people get caught, it's usually either substance itself, or an indirect test like ratios of normally occurring hormones are way off. And usually it's only when they get careless. For example, Alberto Contador got caught with trace amounts of clenbuterol in his blood, and the most probable theory of what happened (he claimed he ate contaminated meat) is that he was blood doping and the blood bag he used had been prepared during a time in training when he was using clenbuterol for weight loss. Lance Armstrong actually tested positive for corticosteroids once, but he managed to slide by getting a doctor to post-date a medical exemption.

Mostly I was being facetious. The reality is, if they were as bad at catching ebola as they are at catching PED use, then we would be in really bad shape.

[marym625]

4. I had the same question

And had actually just read the article right before I saw your post.

What I wonder about now is the fact people can have Ebola without symptoms. Seems that is much more dangerous than those with symptoms.

As the article states, the only way to stop an epidemic here is to stop the one in Africa.

Imagine getting RWNJs to fund fighting a disease in Africa.

[TorchTheWitch]

6. because there is not enough of the virus in their system

before becoming symptomatic to come out positive. As I understand it, two tests are done if the first one is done while the symptoms are still mild then a second one is done if the symptoms get worse. That way they don't clear anyone who is infected but just doesn't have enough virus in their system to show a positive test.