It has been 38 years since the ebola virus was identified. I am sure the CDC and WHO have been conducting research into finding a cure and a vaccine the whole time since then. That makes me doubt that either will be developed anytime soon. So , the only way we have now to stop it is to get ahead of the spread and contain it. Best to do it in Africa and not after it has made it to europe, asia or the americas.

In fact, vaccines against Ebola have been in devlopment for many years. Ebola itself is highly antigeneic (unlike HIV), indicating that succesful vaccine development will be straight forward. What has been lacking is research funds to proceed with this. The tiny number of ebola cases over the last 30 years means there was no money for development from big pharma. US research has not been directed toward Ebola due to lack of need (few cases) and relevanc (absence from US).
BEGIN RANT: In addition. money for biomedical research in the US has been stagnant since around 2008, with no increase (even for inflation). The overall NIH budget is 25% below the level of 2008. Labs are closing, important health issues are not being addressed. We just received notice from NIH that our budget (like all NIH funded research) is being cut 10% effective immediately. This is the result of yet another continuing resolution passed by congress, who can't ever get their act together to decide anything. If you are concerned about Ebola, than get in touch with the politicans who are slowly destroying biomedical research in the US before its too late. END RANT.

I agree with your rant, brendan. excellent point.

Clyde the europeans are broke mate , I herd you Americans stole all there money in 2008 . :)
only joking

---

sorry Clyde but you did set your self up for that one . And I just could not resit .

---

Why this accusation (true) against U.S. 'Big Pharma', and Government Funding? Why would one need a Capitalist 'Big Pharma', be the only one to do this?

Just have the Wealthy European Governments, with their Socialized Medicine, spend Their Money, Build Their Labs, to do this. Come up with 'The Cure', and show The World why Capitalist 'Big Pharma' doesn't work. Why not?

Every accusations against the U.S., and Big Pharma, can also be directed against Wealthy Western Europe.

'The Rant' is only partially true.

Sorry but all of the RANT is true. To address your points. First, I did not specify US big pharma but big pharma in general (including major european companies). Since there was no market for an Ebola vaccine, none of them are going to invest since there is no money to be made. Capitalism will not seek cures for diseases where they can't make a profit. Think malaria/dengue/ebola etc. Thats the area in which governments/philanthropy can have a major impact. Bill Gates is the number one funder of malaria research in the world. Thats the profits of capitalism being used for a socialist cause! And a very American trait which I greatly admire).
Second, socialized/universal health care is the most fantastic system ever invented. I grew up in the UK and emigrated to the US when I was 30. I find health care in the US to be more expensive, rationed by ability to pay and costs twice as much per person as socialized health care in the UK. My parents are in their 90s and get fantastic, and free, health care from the National Health Service in the UK. Don't mock it until you have experienced it.

---

It has been 38 years since the ebola virus was identified. I am sure the CDC and WHO have been conducting research into finding a cure and a vaccine the whole time since then. That makes me doubt that either will be developed anytime soon. So , the only way we have now to stop it is to get ahead of the spread and contain it. Best to do it in Africa and not after it has made it to europe, asia or the americas.

In fact, vaccines against Ebola have been in devlopment for many years. Ebola itself is highly antigeneic (unlike HIV), indicating that succesful vaccine development will be straight forward. What has been lacking is research funds to proceed with this. The tiny number of ebola cases over the last 30 years means there was no money for development from big pharma. US research has not been directed toward Ebola due to lack of need (few cases) and relevanc (absence from US).
BEGIN RANT: In addition. money for biomedical research in the US has been stagnant since around 2008, with no increase (even for inflation). The overall NIH budget is 25% below the level of 2008. Labs are closing, important health issues are not being addressed. We just received notice from NIH that our budget (like all NIH funded research) is being cut 10% effective immediately. This is the result of yet another continuing resolution passed by congress, who can't ever get their act together to decide anything. If you are concerned about Ebola, than get in touch with the politicans who are slowly destroying biomedical research in the US before its too late. END RANT.

I agree with your rant, brendan. excellent point.

Why this accusation (true) against U.S. 'Big Pharma', and Government Funding? Why would one need a Capitalist 'Big Pharma', be the only one to do this?

Just have the Wealthy European Governments, with their Socialized Medicine, spend Their Money, Build Their Labs, to do this. Come up with 'The Cure', and show The World why Capitalist 'Big Pharma' doesn't work. Why not?

Every accusations against the U.S., and Big Pharma, can also be directed against Wealthy Western Europe.

'The Rant' is only partially true.

Clyde,
Brendan's RANT (which I put into BOLD) was the part of his post I responded to.

I do believe that Government funding is not an ideal situation.

But, given the realities of the current situation, the US Federal Government IS a major funder of scientific research in the USA, not just biomedical, but ALL of it. And perhaps... just perhaps, they SHOULD be.

I know this might be heresy to Libertarian ideals for me to believe this, but, as Brendan says, 'there is no money in Ebola'. Some things need researching when there just isn't any money in it, hence private concerns have no real motivation to do so.

Personally, I find Government funding of scientific research to be a lot more palatable than many other things the Government funds (as in wealth-transfer-social programs)...

Sorry, but Brendan's RANT stands in my opinion... The US Congress needs to get its act together and start passing Budgets and stop this 'continuing resolution' B.S.

The overall NIH budget is 25% below the level of 2008. Labs are closing, important health issues are not being addressed. We just received notice from NIH that our budget (like all NIH funded research) is being cut 10% effective immediately. This is the result of yet another continuing resolution passed by congress, who can't ever get their act together to decide anything. If you are concerned about Ebola, than get in touch with the politicans who are slowly destroying biomedical research in the US before its too late. END RANT.

Unfunded wars and tax cuts are more important.

---

I know this might be heresy to Libertarian ideals for me to believe this, but, as Brendan says, 'there is no money in Ebola'. Some things need researching when there just isn't any money in it, hence private concerns have no real motivation to do so.

Personally, I find Government funding of scientific research to be a lot more palatable than many other things the Government funds (as in wealth-transfer-social programs)...

IIRC in the heyday every dollar spent on NASA brought in ten dollars in additional tax revenue. Only a dolt doesn't understand that and would transfer money from NASA to welfare. Same applies to other basic or pure research.

As to the government and pure science, as any government funded research is owned by the government, it is not copyrighted, trademarked and patented, but owned by the people. Anyone can come along and make money off it, just as anyone can come along and use a road to move their goods to make money. Now perhaps the USA should prevent its transfer to other countries, but that is another discussion.

---

Yeah, You Stop The HuWoMan Traffic From W. Afrika, you Diminish The DEM/Lib Votes Here fO The Midterms.

Yeah, No Voter I D is GOoD, when You Coming To Amerika, from Afrika.

Yeah, Now YOU GET 'IT'.

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Grim report.

Global Ebola outbreak deaths exceed 4,000 - WHO

he number of deaths attributed to the Ebola outbreak has risen above 4,000, the World Health Organization says.

The latest figures show there have been 4,024 confirmed or suspected deaths in the worst-affected West African nations of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Eight deaths are linked to the haemorrhagic fever in Senegal and one in the US.

In total, there have been 8,399 confirmed or suspected cases, mostly in West Africa.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29577175

---

Perspective
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2787987/the-world-s-deadliest-outbreaks-interactive-map-shows-human-cost-flu-bubonic-plague-ebola-globe-541.html
Spanish Flu 75,000,000
Ebola 4,000

---

Perspective
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2787987/the-world-s-deadliest-outbreaks-interactive-map-shows-human-cost-flu-bubonic-plague-ebola-globe-541.html
Spanish Flu 75,000,000
Ebola 4,000

Well the Spanish Flu also had 4000 deaths after a while, then it grew exponentially.

Yeah, they all start somewhere with only a few deaths.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Perspective
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2787987/the-world-s-deadliest-outbreaks-interactive-map-shows-human-cost-flu-bubonic-plague-ebola-globe-541.html
Spanish Flu 75,000,000
Ebola 4,000

Well the Spanish Flu also had 4000 deaths after a while, then it grew exponentially.

Yeah, they all start somewhere with only a few deaths.

Ebola, 1976 to today, 38 years. Spanish Flu 1918-23, 5 years. I'm so terrified that Ebola is spreading faster than the flu! Try 2009 swine flu (1 season) killed 14,000 and that is with modern medicine and vaccines.

You all need to stop listening to the BS doom and gloom sell more advertising news. Flu is far more deadly than Ebola. I want to hear all of you calling for travel bans over the flu or admit the real reason you are calling for them over Ebola, which I strongly suspect has something to do with who is catching it and a belief that group can be marginalized.

---

Perspective
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2787987/the-world-s-deadliest-outbreaks-interactive-map-shows-human-cost-flu-bubonic-plague-ebola-globe-541.html
Spanish Flu 75,000,000
Ebola 4,000

Well the Spanish Flu also had 4000 deaths after a while, then it grew exponentially.

Yeah, they all start somewhere with only a few deaths.

Ebola, 1976 to today, 38 years. Spanish Flu 1918-23, 5 years. I'm so terrified that Ebola is spreading faster than the flu! Try 2009 swine flu (1 season) killed 14,000 and that is with modern medicine and vaccines.

You all need to stop listening to the BS doom and gloom sell more advertising news. Flu is far more deadly than Ebola. I want to hear all of you calling for travel bans over the flu or admit the real reason you are calling for them over Ebola, which I strongly suspect has something to do with who is catching it and a belief that group can be marginalized.

here is a link to wiki article inregards to the swine flu of 2009. It draws from CDC reports. SwineFlu
Way down it states that the fatality rate for the swine flu was 0.01-0.03%
The moratality rate for the 1918 Spansich flu was 2-3%
So that that tells me a hell of a lot of people were infected by both flus.

The current mortality rate for this strain of Ebola is running at 50% to 60%.
So you want to ingnore Ebola as a serious threat? Now whos marginalizing?

---

[/quote]

Old James

Perspective
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2787987/the-world-s-deadliest-outbreaks-interactive-map-shows-human-cost-flu-bubonic-plague-ebola-globe-541.html
Spanish Flu 75,000,000
Ebola 4,000

Well the Spanish Flu also had 4000 deaths after a while, then it grew exponentially.

Yeah, they all start somewhere with only a few deaths.

Ebola, 1976 to today, 38 years. Spanish Flu 1918-23, 5 years. I'm so terrified that Ebola is spreading faster than the flu! Try 2009 swine flu (1 season) killed 14,000 and that is with modern medicine and vaccines.

You all need to stop listening to the BS doom and gloom sell more advertising news. Flu is far more deadly than Ebola. I want to hear all of you calling for travel bans over the flu or admit the real reason you are calling for them over Ebola, which I strongly suspect has something to do with who is catching it and a belief that group can be marginalized.

here is a link to wiki article inregards to the swine flu of 2009. It draws from CDC reports. SwineFlu
Way down it states that the fatality rate for the swine flu was 0.01-0.03%
The moratality rate for the 1918 Spansich flu was 2-3%
So that that tells me a hell of a lot of people were infected by both flus.

The current mortality rate for this strain of Ebola is running at 50% to 60%.
So you want to ingnore Ebola as a serious threat? Now whos marginalizing?

Ebola is not contagious, flu is. Listen to the doctors, not the media pundits.

---

Ebola is not contagious, flu is. Listen to the doctors, not the media pundits.

con·ta·gious
kənˈtājəs/
adjective

1.
(of a disease) spread from one person or organism to another by direct or indirect contact.
(of a person or animal) likely to transmit a disease by contact with other people or animals.

2.
(of an emotion, feeling, or attitude) likely to spread to and affect others.

Oh, really, Gary?

UK "Expects" handful of cases

Will we see similar slip-ups as occurred in the States?

UK "Expects" handful of cases

Will we see similar slip-ups as occurred in the States?

Well, hopefully the UK will have learned from the rather p**s-poor example of the USA's response to the Dallas case, and the Spanish response to their case where many of the same mistakes were made.

Ebola is not contagious, flu is. Listen to the doctors, not the media pundits.

con·ta·gious
kənˈtājəs/
adjective

1.
(of a disease) spread from one person or organism to another by direct or indirect contact.
(of a person or animal) likely to transmit a disease by contact with other people or animals.

2.
(of an emotion, feeling, or attitude) likely to spread to and affect others.

Oh, really, Gary?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contagious_disease wrote:

The non-contagious category of infections usually require a special mode of transmission between persons or hosts. These include ... by non-casual transfer of bodily fluid

e.g. preparing the body for burial, cleaning up vomit ...

---

A non contagious disease would be most if not all cancers. I consider anything you can get from someone else in any manner is contagious.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

A non contagious disease would be most if not all cancers. I consider anything you can get from someone else in any manner is contagious.

+1

---