Ebola Zaire Virus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td81qAiux_s

The Dominica government has joined its OECS sister countries of St. Vincent and St. Lucia in placing restrictions on travel between Dominica and the Ebola stricken West African countries of Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia.

According to a statement issued by the ministry of health on Friday afternoon, “In view of the widespread and sustained transmission of Ebola in Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia, the Ministry of Health wishes to inform the public that the Cabinet of the Commonwealth of Dominica has advised with immediate effect, travel restrictions has been placed on persons travelling to and from these countries for the next three months.”

The ministry of health says persons travelling from Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia or those who have visited any of these countries during a twenty-eight (28) days period will not be allowed entry into Dominica.

“The general public is advised that although assessments conducted by the regional health institutions, Caribbean Public Health Agency (CARPHA) and the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO/WHO) indicate that the risk of the introduction of Ebola to the region is low, like the other countries in the region, Dominica still remains at risk of an imported case of Ebola due to international travel,” the ministry points out in its statement.

St. Lucia and St Vincent and the Grenadines recently placed a ban on nationals from Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea entering those OECS countries, as Caribbean countries continue to put measures in place to deal with a possible outbreak of the deadly Ebola virus in the region.

The ministry of health says it will continue to monitor the global situation with regard to Ebola and advise the public accordingly.

St. Maarten is issuing a travel ban from Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo - “until the areas and countries are declared Ebola-free by the World Health Organization (WHO).”

Add St. Maarten to the list of Caribbean destinations banning travelers from several West African countries due to Ebola. The country’s minister of public health today announced bans on entry to St. Maarten for “all persons that have travelled in the past 21 days to, from and through Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo.”

The ban will remain in effect “until the areas and countries are declared Ebola-free by the World Health Organization (WHO),” said the minister of health, Dr. Cornelius De Wever. The ban also applies to people who “have been in contact with a suspected or confirmed Ebola case from affected countries.”

St. Maarten has also banned passengers aboard any “boat or ship that has a person or persons on board that have suspected or confirmed case(s) of Ebola.” Incoming flights with suspected cases of Ebola will be allowed to land, refuel and return to country of origin, DeWever said.

St. Maarten joins Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, Suriname, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines in imposing Ebola-linked bans on West African travelers.

Although they acknowledge there are no direct flights from the West African countries to any Caribbean destinations, regional government health and tourism officials have said their countries lack the facilities and services to deal with an Ebola epidemic. Several added that because their countries are so tourism-dependent they must take extra precautions.

Interestingly, while the St. Maarten statement mentions WHO, the same organization recommends that countries refrain from enacting travel bans. Nevertheless, Caribbean officials seem determined to prevent any possibility the virus could be introduced to their islands.

"We regret that we are in the position where we need to restrict travel to our island, however, we must put the health and well-being of our people and visitors alike ahead of everything else," said Ted Richardson, St. Maarten’s minister of tourism, economic affairs, transportation and telecommunication.

http://www.travelpulse.com/news/destinations/st-maarten-imposes-ebola-driven-travel-ban.html

At least they admit they are not prepared to deal with an Ebola outbreaks on their island nations and are being proactive in dealing with the issue. Unlike our own government.

At least they admit they are not prepared to deal with an Ebola outbreaks on their island nations and are being proactive in dealing with the issue. Unlike our own government.

what issue?

At least they admit they are not prepared to deal with an Ebola outbreaks on their island nations and are being proactive in dealing with the issue. Unlike our own government.

what issue?

Good day,

May I opine? St. Maarten realizes the horrific consequences of a possible Ebola Zaire outbreak on their island - an outbreak of a virulent virus, which they know they cannot deal with from any position in terms of the extraordinary and necessary medical care demands on their health care system through the exorbitant financial requirements needed to engage in this war.

As the article points out: "...Although they acknowledge there are no direct flights from the West African countries to any Caribbean destinations, regional government health and tourism officials have said their countries lack the facilities and services to deal with an Ebola epidemic. Several added that because their countries are so tourism-dependent they must take extra precautions..."

The issue(s): Ebola Zaire is the "monster of all monsters," because of it's virulence, it's unique ability to disguise itself by shutting off the victim's immune system, it's insidious nature to strip all dignity from the infected individual, and - in the end- render a horrific pain-filled death to up to 90% of the affected - Ebola is an issue.

Specialized services, equipment, training, and facilities are mandatory in treating those afflicted with Ebola Viruses: Most small island communities do not have the requirements, equipment, hospital and isolation/ quarantine facilities to meet the needs necessary to properly treat patients with Ebola. Therefore, lack of proper facilities and highly trained medical personnel that are mandatory and required to deal with Ebola Zaire are obvious; This is another issue.

Catastrophic consequences would, without any doubt, result should an Ebola Zaire outbreak occur on any small island community. I don't need to expand on this: This is an all important and glaring issue.

I feel that these are just but a few issues when regarding Ebola Zaire and small island communities. A travel ban, as St. Maarten has recently established, may be the only alternative to address the issue(s) of Ebola Zaire in a broadened scope. To protect the island community is the goal of these island governments in light of an unprecedented epidemic taking place on other continents.

When confronting an Ebola Zaire epidemic such as this one, many issues are brought to the forefront; how could they not, unfortunately.
Swan

what issue?

Good day,

death to up to 90% of the affected - Ebola is an issue.

Your a "science" minded guy.. do you agree with the use of that statistic? (do you know how it originated, how many cases were examined?) Do you think that is "across the board" applicable?
proper facilities and highly trained medical personnel that are mandatory and required to deal with Ebola Zaire are obvious

Obvious, what is obvious? obviously Africa has handled the disease quite well and they are probably worse off than some of the island nations

to date Dengue is far more fatal killing around 25,000 anally, where as ebola this year has still not broken 5,000 fatalities

Catastrophic consequences would, without any doubt, result should an Ebola Zaire outbreak occur on any small island community. I don't need to expand on this:

Well, since catastrophic consequences haven't happened anywhere else, I think you DO need to expand on this, are you HOPING they happen? because they aren't... not anywhere....

When confronting an Ebola Zaire epidemic such as this one, many issues are brought to the forefront; how could they not, unfortunately.
Swan

yes, issues.

Here's what should be everyone first issue:

An epidemic is the rapid spread of infectious disease to a large number of persons in a given population within a short period of time, usually two years or less. For example, in meningococcal infections, an attack rate in excess of 15 cases per 100,000 persons for two consecutive weeks is considered an epidemic

Have we reached this rate anywhere? "In excess of 15 cases per 100,000 persons for two consecutive weeks"?

Why are we incorrectly using the word "epidemic"; is it just to cause fear and panic?

when this fades into the background (as it is already doing with no real assistance from anyone) as a non-issue, will you choose to re-evaluate how you handled this situation, or will you jump on the next fear train and play the game the same way next time?

LF: I'm not a guy; I'm a lady. Thank you.

While several small rural communities in Africa have dealt with an Ebola outbreak on several occasions since 1976, these have been controlled and contained, because the villages where they occurred were remote. Basically, when the affected individuals died, the virus spread came to an end. The largest of the outbreaks in Africa was 318 deaths. No treatment existed then and no proven treatment exists today to combat Ebola Zaire.

This particular 'outbreak, epidemic, or whatever definition one wishes to apply to it' has lasted longer and affected thousands, because Africa's large population areas have been involved. The numbers are all questionable in terms of cases of Ebola and deaths from Ebola: Ebola Zaire kills up to 90% of those infected, whereby Ebola Sudan kills about 50%; Ebola Reston has not killed one human individual. The numbers recorded in this situation are believed to be underestimated (WHO-World Health Organization) due to extraneous circumstances (infected people hiding from authorities, black market death certificates unlawfully being issued permitting family burial of family members, continuing traditional burial rites in secret, overfilled hospitals and quarantine facilities that are turning away many people); therefore, percentages of cases and deaths cited have been lower than actual (79%). Some reports state 50%, 70%, 80%... the real numbers are not known. Please note: Articles and their links have been posted on this thread regarding these reports and conclusions.

What is being dealt with here is a virus. It is a very nasty and unforgiving virus; one of the worse in the world. But it is a viral entity, never-the-less. There is no room for fear mongering and certainly no one would wish this on anyone! I can't fathom any sane person feeling happy about the course in which this virus is taking or using it to raise fears in anyone. Fear has no place except to heighten cautiousness when treating a victim with the infection.

There is no room for politics in this current situation. Clearly, Ebola Zaire is out of control and can't be contained. If any fear arises, it is fear of the gruesome nature of Ebola Zaire infection and the sustaining complications which exist if one recovers from the virus also.

Knowledge about Ebola Zaire Virus can help put perspective on it and on the situation at hand. Knowledge about Zaire can help provide guidance for those unsure as how to approach it, including guidance for governments around the world.

Putting aside of all the other extraneous factors, what is important is that we are dealing with a virus: Ebola Zaire.
Swan
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/history/chronology.html

Clearly, Ebola Zaire is out of control and can't be contained.

do you really feel comfortable making statements like that or are you just copying and pasting other peoples opinion?

Clearly Ebola is a joke compared to real issues we have going on; just be cause the glowing box of social programming decided to focus on it doesn't mean it deserves any real attention with out critically examining what is going on.

this sensationalist crap is a waste of mental effort. The numbers just aren't there for this situation to be taken as seriously as the living-room-god is telling you.

G'morning LF,

Let me try to address your questions: Speaking to the current Ebola situation in Africa, the viral spread is out of control. While I am expressing my own opinion based on my educational background and knowledge of this particular virus since it's discovery, I am, additionally, following the reports issued from WHO, CDC, and other organizations on the ground in Africa. Some of these reports I have shared on the board. Therefore the statements regarding Ebola currently being out of control and uncontainable are of my own opinion and the opinions of such organizations as WHO. Keep in mind that this Ebola outbreak is unprecedented. An outbreak of this magnitude (although the numbers are still being evaluated) has not occurred before.

You commented that Ebola is a 'joke compared to some real issues and that the sensationalism surrounding it is a 'waste of mental effort' - referring to the chart in which you copied and pasted, Ebola, unlike the other maladies cited, has taken hundreds of health worker's lives as these individuals attempted to treat the victims infected with this virus. The other 'real issues' as you define them, are not necessarily lethal to the medical community and society as a whole and I can't seem to define those facts as being 'sensationalism.'

No one knows definitively where this situation is heading in Africa, because past outbreaks of Ebola have been contained and controlled (they occurred in small rural villages.) This is new territory; Ebola is taking us on a new journey.

Please read up on Ebola Zaire. Research the scientific papers written on this particular virus; I'm confident you will find a new respect for one of our worst enemies that is on a mission of its own. In the meantime, while the world is guessing exactly where Ebola's mission will take us, a bit of proactivity and education would not be a waste of time. My opinion.

Swan

Are you familiar with Logical Fallacy? it is a way of trying to make an argument with out using actual data.

A common logical fallacy is called "Appeal to Authority", where instead of using actual data or facts you use perceived authority figures as your backing.

Another is "appeal to emotion" , a good example of which is:

Ebola currently being out of control and uncontainable are of my own opinion and the opinions of such organizations as WHO

(though, really that's appeal to emotion AND appeal to authority being used in one sentence there).

None of these words line up with reality. this "uncontrollable outbreak" has been going on since march or so, right? and STILL we have less than 5,000 deaths?

when the facts are examined and logic is applied the story from WHO, CDC and the news Media just does not add up.

This will fade away to nothing as it is already currently doing, it is not uncontrollable, it is not uncontainable, it is NOT even that contagious (despite all the hype that must be very carefully examined for word usage and "couching" tactics).

TB is FAR more contagious AND just as deadly in africa (where treatment is a rare thing for any disease).
We do not hear about it because it doesn't meat the sensationalist requirements to "sell" air time.

Nine conversations ago, I posted the following link (and statement) about St. Maarten's travel ban from the Ebola hit regions in Africa to their island. The government is using this measure as a proactive response to afford protection for their community, since they concluded that the special facilities and services required to treat those individuals infected with the Ebola Virus could not be provided. I am reposting the link below:

http://www.travelpulse.com/news/destinations/st-maarten-imposes-ebola-driven-travel-ban.html

"...St. Maarten joins Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, Suriname, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines in imposing Ebola-linked bans on West African travelers...."

Swan

It's dismaying to read liquidflorides disputations.
He is disregarding known facts regarding hemorrhagic viruses which are deadly and have taken many lives in a most horrific manner, especially in this most recent outbreak of Ebola.

In a world with little to no boarders, thanks to the ease of travel, these diseases can and do spread with ease. The toll taken on human life is not fabricated. The toll taken on the lives of health care workers helping those infected with this disease is not fabricated nor exaggerated.

Lf is not an immunologist nor a virologist nor does he work for the world health organization which is more educated on the subject than he is. I don't understand why he is intent on downplaying the effects and the potential hazards associated with a deadly virus that has no known cure unless he just likes to hear himself speak and enjoys the controversy.

The Caribbean islands that have put bans in place have done so because they are being proactive and realize that they do not have the human nor financial resources to protect their populations should they have to deal with an infected individual nor be qualified to contain and make safe an environment in which that individual(s) may have contaminated without the risk to others.

Let's face it, other hemorrhagic outbreaks have been contained mainly because they occurred in isolated locations and they killed quickly, leaving no survivors. Not because we eradicated them or had a cure but because they had no new hosts to infect. Let's not forget their main purpose is to find hosts. These organisms can and do mutate for their survival and have been known to jump species.

The mere fact that the virus in no longer contained on one small section of a continent should be a concern. The fact that it was no longer confined to an isolated village should have been a major concern, to begin with.

Read up on hemorrhagic viruses (and there are lots of them) and the costs of the consequences in terms of ignoring them and not being prepared or being proactive in dealing with these virulent diseases.

The majority of diseases you showed in an above graph, could have been treated, cured or eliminated with immunizations.

Oh, that's right, you don't believe in vaccinations either.

Stop comparing apples to oranges.

If as you say"this sensationalist crap is a waste of mental effort," then why don't you move your mental efforts on to another subject.

Stop comparing apples to oranges.
If as you say"this sensationalist crap is a waste of mental effort," then why don't you move your mental efforts on to another subject.

excuse my empathy.

As you'll note, your entire post holds not a single fact, bit of data nor historical reference; it does contain many logical fallacies.

Lets break down what I am saying before you get to carried away.

Ebola is real.

A small (relatively) amount of people have died from it since march.

The spread of the disease is not following predicted paths, numbers or severity.

I have supplied plenty of data not 2 or 3 posts above this to back up these statements. (and some of that data is from the trusted and often quoted "CDC")

Is what was typed here unreasonable? If you were an outside party, unemotionally attached to this subject and you read your last post, what would you actually get from it?

I would get that you have nothing of value to add.

I would get that you have nothing of value to add.

yes, calls for rationality and putting ideas into perspective are often seen this way.

FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real) is a very powerful emotion; I would see that it is not overly fed by those that do not understand it's power.

Look at what 9/11 gave us.. the greatest erosion of personal freedom EVER due to fear.

I'd like to hope the same does not happen here, though it already has in some areas (medical emergencies established in states that have no cases of ebola, legislation being drummed down the isle due to the same etc...)

yes, nothing of value at all.

If as you say"this sensationalist crap is a waste of mental effort," then why don't you move your mental efforts on to another subject.

If as you say"this sensationalist crap is a waste of mental effort," then why don't you move your mental efforts on to another subject.

because we are a community, a global family and I would not let you walk a long a road at night in the rain anymore than I would let my wife or children.

because this is a public forum and not just a book I am reading; because I am deeply aware of the audience that is present, and growing.

because of love.

Then you should make yourself more aware of your surroundings whether locally or globally. Many walk a long road without the resources that others have available.

LiquidFloride I have to agree with you about fear. 9/11 did give us the greatest erosion of personal freedom EVER due to fear. Fear is never a good thing. Knowledge, information and preparation however is always good thing.

Miss Swan is a scientist. Sorry Miss Swan for tooting your horn but I know you never would. Sorry for speaking for you but I know that it is only your kindness and love for the VI that causes you to post on Ebola.

Miss Swan is an "expert" on this disease. She is not a "fear monger".

I am not an "expert" but I have friends and family members who are now in Africa fighting to stop this horrible "outbreak, epidemic" what ever you want to call it. My friends and family members are missionaries and members of the military. It is far far worse than what is being reported on American media. If you want the real story via the media look at African newspapers, BBC or foreign news.

Even though American media has stopped reporting, (got to wonder why), our president is asking congress for millions to fight Ebola. The missionaries are leaving Africa in droves as we are sending more and more military. Think about that.

This "outbreak, epidemic" is killing far more than is reported. It is "out of control". People are dying in the streets, the bush, in their homes. The rest are starving and quarantined in their neighborhoods and villages begging for help to remove the dead bodies. Africa is now arresting media who are reporting what is really going on.

The WHO and the CDC are begging for help while trying to hide what is really going on because they did not respond when the outbreak started.

Do I sound like a fear monger? Probably. Would a case of Ebola devastate St. Croix? Yes!!! It would spread like wildfire without any medical infastructure to combat it. Any island that is not prepared would be devastated. Will it spread outside of Africa?Very Possible. The US and Europe may be able to handle it but 3rd world countries no way. The largest population of foreign workers in Africa are from India and China. China and India evacuated thousands of workers from West Africa in the last month or so. Hopefully they are all healthy.

Should the Caribbean Islands be worried? We should be prepared with knowledge. Should we restrict travel from African countries. I would think so with all the tourism. Should we panic? No!

In any case, knowledge is not fear. Knowledge reduces fear.

I'm not a scientist, just a soldier and systems analyst.

that is to say, I analyse systems for a living, breaking down components to sub components, looking at the over all effect and possible outcome(s).

I have nothing against Ms swan, I understand completely what someone inundated in "the industry" would think about a situation like this that is leveraged by every single bit of media we know possible (song, TV, News, Social media (to some extent)) as well as many three lettered agencies; and yet citizens of Africa do not think the disease is real. There is an active campaign to "inform them" of it's existence.

If that is not a red flag for an "epidemic" that has been going on since march, then I don't know what is.

Two of my close friends deployed to Africa recently with the 82nd (yes, we sent paratroopers to combat a virus...) I have a much different perspective on these items and am viewing this from perhaps a different angle than most people are willing to take.

What would have happened if someone said on September 20th 2001 that the Patriot act was nearly treasonous and that it would breed known Edward Snowden and Julian Assange (and the many that came before them and have been all but forgotten) and the travesty that are the current NSA actions (I can go into a bit more detail on this as I've assisted on the setup of Nexus centers, that is the point at which all internet hubs siphon off every 1 and 0 to be permanently stored in databases that are sized in numbers that are incomprehensible to most people; they started with thousands of Petabites (one quadrillion (short scale) bytes) back in 2003, it has since far outgrown the original facilities I was in Iraq during the sustainment operations and got to see first hand the difference between network media and reality.

I see the same tactics being played out here, to what end I am not sure.

You say the numbers are being under reported, I beg to differ. I think the opposite is possible if not that then they are being reported accurately.

I know about Ebola, it is not a friendly disease to the very poor African nations, suffering from chronic Vit D deficiency and having a compromised immune system (from various factors) allows diseases to look much worse than they would be in healthy subjects, even "westerners" are "healthy" comparatively. I've not yet been to the continent of Africa myself and so I have no first hand knowledge of this, but men I've bled with have and I trust them and their accounts of what is happening.

I live a comfortable life now, I'm no longer active duty and I get to sit at a desk in AC (which I don't even have at my house) but I remember.

Suffice it to say that I would ask that everyone stops "knowing" what is going on and starts doing some actual leg work, do your own research. No offense to Swans but Information unverified is not good for anyone (and truly the root of the logical fallacy appeal to authority).

Doug, your message furthers the credentials of previous messengers, yet adds nothing usable to deciding on the topic at hand, I have attempted to bring comparative data to the table.. I'm not sure why that is met with resistance.

I've played the appeal to authority game a bit myself here in giving context to "me" but the messenger should not matter, the context and content of the message should.

so I guess I'll close with.

Too soon?

(when is it ever to soon for someone to personally understand and research situations?)

New York Times article

LETTER FROM AFRICA
The Reality of Ebola, a World Away
DANIEL BEREHULAK FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

DAKAR, Senegal — There are two realities about the current Ebola epidemic in West Africa — one from inside the infected zone, and another from outside of it.

Outside the zone, a miracle drug — ZMapp, or some iteration of it — is just around the corner, to sweep the problem away. The Western narrative of scientific progress demands no less. Inside the zone, fearful villagers and city dwellers continue to hide sick relatives, cross borders carrying the infection and touch infected corpses at funerals. More become infected, and more die. The epidemic, not science, advances.

Outside the zone, somebody else must be to blame for the worst Ebola epidemic in history: the United States or Europe, for not providing enough help or money, or international health agencies, for not committing enough resources or for not having stamped it out already.

Inside the zone, attention is focused on staying alive and coping, not blaming. Inside the zone, Doctors Without Borders, a largely European organization, is stretched to the breaking point and is forced to turn away Ebola patients, the United States government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has committed scientists to the anti-Ebola fight — dozens have been deployed to the region, according to the C.D.C. — and even the maligned World Health Organization has sent in doctors, epidemiologists and health workers who are putting themselves at risk.

Video | Dying of Ebola at the Hospital Door Monrovia, the Liberian capital, is facing a widespread Ebola epidemic, and as the number of infected grows faster than hospital capacity, some patients wait outside near death.

Outside the zone, hysteria over Ebola has led to the collective stigmatization of a big chunk of the African continent. Anybody coming from West Africa is suspected of carrying the disease. Inside the zone, life goes on, and people shop in markets — if not quite as normal, then at least as much so as human survival mechanisms will allow. Near the gates of the Ebola treatment center in Guéckédou, Guinea, for instance, where the epidemic started, a licentious-looking bar called the “Deuxième Bureau” — “Second Office,” a local reference to the house of a kept woman or mistress — was still welcoming customers in mid-July, even as dying Ebola patients were being ferried past.

The clash of these two realities is to be expected, given the extreme circumstances. It is like this when one disadvantaged corner of the world is beset by a calamity, and the rest of the world peers in, anxiously and imperfectly, from a vantage point in which no one worries about relative order, a constant supply of electricity and running water, and air-conditioning. But the contrast is particularly striking this time because there is no risk in simply stepping off the few remaining planes flying in to Freetown, Conakry or Monrovia — contrary to what some in the West appear to believe.

Yet here is where the two narratives join up: because there is real fear, inside and outside the zone. Inside the Ebola zone, the fear is based on a potent reality. Ebola kills about half its victims, the epidemic is so far unchecked, and the medical resources on the ground, largely sent in from elsewhere, are not keeping pace. In fact they are losing ground.

That truth is difficult for people in the West to grasp. The misapprehension is comprehensible, because one of the world’s deadliest viruses is afflicting the weakest, least-prepared societies in the world. The consequences of such a confrontation cannot be anything other than fearsome. Nothing now stands in the way of the disease except the overstretched foreign aid agencies.

It is difficult for people in the West to imagine the extent of disorganization in these countries. There is a near-total absence of effectively functioning institutions of any sort, let alone those devoted to health care. Years of exploitation by thieving elites — followed by brutal civil wars that were in some ways the inevitable consequence — substituted for institution- and nation-building in Liberia and Sierra Leone, the two hardest-hit countries. In Guinea, a sinister, ideologically motivated dictator ruled his country with an iron hand for a quarter century.

The lesson for the country’s beleaguered inhabitants was the same as in its neighbors, a lesson now playing out with awful consequences: The state and institutions were always sources of suffering, not succor.

Video link:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/video/world/africa/100000003118843/how-america-may-help-combat-ebola.html

Good Morning LiquidFloride, I wanted to correct that this is Tammy posting and not Doug.

I would like to clarify that I am not an "expert" on anything but I have "researched" this "outbreak" extensively since it started. My "research" has not included mainstream media. My knowledge has come from reading everything I can find on the subject and talking to my brother, who is a missionary, a friend with a sister who is a missionary working with Ebola patients in Africa, friends and family members who are military currently, "boots on the ground" in Africa.

I certainly cannot dispute your analysis of the situation nor to I care too. Information is information and we are all free to contribute.

The only issue that I have is that you assume that no one contributing on this thread has done any research and that they have less knowledge than you and the combative way you questioned their information.

While I know that the contributors to this thread are only doing so to provide "well researched" information and knowledge in order to educate the population of the VI you interpreted the information as fear mongering and false. You are entitled to that opinion and free to express it.

Most of the posts on this thread have not been "opinions" but a passing along information. There was no "opinion" expressed about certain islands banning travel from West Africa only a link provided to pass along the information.

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=dVPF3SO0trU

Published on Oct 10, 2014A special report from Sky's Special Correspondent Alex Crawford on the ground in Liberia as the country fights to contain the deadly ebola outbreak.

My simple response is

1. R0
2. Am I supposed to be more afraid of Ebola or ISIS?