19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame and Global Risk
Ebola and the Clash of Civilizations world war
** 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame and Global Risk
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e141019
Contents:
The Ebola endgame
Updating the Global Conflict Risk Assessment for Ebola
The World Health Organization (WHO)
Ebola in West Africa
Ebola in megacities and dense slums
Ebola in war zones
Keys:
Generational Dynamics, Ebola, World Health Organization, WHO,
Global Conflict Risk Assessment, West Africa, China
Ebola and the Clash of Civilizations world war
** 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame and Global Risk
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e141019
Contents:
The Ebola endgame
Updating the Global Conflict Risk Assessment for Ebola
The World Health Organization (WHO)
Ebola in West Africa
Ebola in megacities and dense slums
Ebola in war zones
Keys:
Generational Dynamics, Ebola, World Health Organization, WHO,
Global Conflict Risk Assessment, West Africa, China
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Given the proclivity of suicide bombers...hurling corpses won't be necessary. A very scary future is unfolding for mankind.
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Why has the Western Europe risk been changed to a 3? Is this because of the recent conflict in Ukraine?
Thanks,
Joe
Thanks,
Joe
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Because of two things: The Ukraine crisis and Greece's financial crisis. Both of these have revived WW II tensions.jwfid wrote:Why has the Western Europe risk been changed to a 3? Is this because of the recent conflict in Ukraine?
Thanks,
Joe
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
A big problem when it comes to China's preparations is that our defenses aren't up for the task. Our defense system is designed to handle a limited ICBM attack, like Iran or North Korea launching their weapons at us. We'd never be able to hold back a full scale military strike. We could hit back, of course, but it would still be small comfort to people who die in nuclear fire.
When it comes to Ebola, nobody but you seems to mention the danger and frankly, near certainty of it traveling into war zones. When I mentioned it, the reply is usually: "They'll just kill the infected person; game over" completely missing the point about how it's impossible to track cases in such a dangerous environment. We're a wealthy, stable country and we're still having difficulty doing so. I doubt this will be the last case of Ebola on our shores.
Both the CDC and the WHO are saying that the numbers of cases are dramatically undereported due to lack of resources and rural areas. So figure on something like 20,000 infections right now. I don't think it'll be 1.4 million by January next year, but certainly by late spring, early summer.
I'd figure on about a year or so to produce a working vaccine and another several months to be able to produce it in large numbers. By that time, most of the population of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone will be dead. Another thing to consider is that each country will be mostly focused on saving their own people and if they give out many of the vaccinations to West Africa, you'll see a lot of outrage from us, demanding that we are vaccinated first.
I have no idea what the final toll is going to be, but this is going to get very ugly, very quickly, especially when populations start panicking.
When it comes to Ebola, nobody but you seems to mention the danger and frankly, near certainty of it traveling into war zones. When I mentioned it, the reply is usually: "They'll just kill the infected person; game over" completely missing the point about how it's impossible to track cases in such a dangerous environment. We're a wealthy, stable country and we're still having difficulty doing so. I doubt this will be the last case of Ebola on our shores.
Both the CDC and the WHO are saying that the numbers of cases are dramatically undereported due to lack of resources and rural areas. So figure on something like 20,000 infections right now. I don't think it'll be 1.4 million by January next year, but certainly by late spring, early summer.
I'd figure on about a year or so to produce a working vaccine and another several months to be able to produce it in large numbers. By that time, most of the population of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone will be dead. Another thing to consider is that each country will be mostly focused on saving their own people and if they give out many of the vaccinations to West Africa, you'll see a lot of outrage from us, demanding that we are vaccinated first.
I have no idea what the final toll is going to be, but this is going to get very ugly, very quickly, especially when populations start panicking.
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Thank-you for seeing what I see in the infamous potential of Ebola today. I have read a few articles by some very smart people (Chris Martenson and Jack Spirko) I respect and I just can't understand their lack of respect for this disease.
Joe
Joe
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Also, I wonder what would happen in Europe if Putin began to annex other countries along their border. I know that some of the Russian leaders would like to do just that, seeing that the West's response has been rather feeble.
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Excellent post John.
The current status of an Ebola outbreak, and vaccine development: http://www.theday.com/article/20141018/NWS14/310189923
The current status of an Ebola outbreak, and vaccine development: http://www.theday.com/article/20141018/NWS14/310189923
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Much of the spreading does seem to happen while people are trying to care for the sick. ISIS would just shoot and burn anyone with a fever. So it may not spread faster in them anyway.Trevor wrote: "They'll just kill the infected person; game over" completely missing the point about how it's impossible to track cases in such a dangerous environment.
The spanish flu spread well during trench warefare as people brush past each other in cold damp trenches of Europe. A desert war may not have the same spreading effectiveness.
Last edited by vincecate on Sun Oct 19, 2014 7:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 19-Oct-14 World View -- Forecasting the Ebola endgame
Often with dangerous viruses there will be mutated versions that are not as dangerous. Because people fight the deadly version so hard, and the deadly version kills its host sooner, the less dangerous versions spread faster. This goes on in degrees till there is effectively a version of the disease that acts as a vacine traveling ahead of the dangerous version. So this type of thing may save us.
The real question is where will it have exponential growth. It seems it won't have exponential growth in all countries. In Africa they have customs like touching the dead, eating bushmeet, or not believing in germs, that contribute to the spread of ebola. In the West we have a much better chance that ebola does not have exponential growth. So it may well be the case that it doubles every month in parts of Africa but that in the USA it averages less than 1 person infected from each infected person and does not grow on its own inside the USA. If there is an infection rate each infected person on average infects 0.8 others, it won't have explosive exponential growth in the USA. But 1 person coming in might result in 5 people dying. So if there are 100,000 or 1 mil cases outside the USA, there could be over 1,000 people inside the USA that die. Note that the Mexican border is not checking temperatures for people who cross ilegally. If it becomes millions outside the USA then thousands inside is possible, even with a less than 1 infection rate.
Even if initially it has exponential growth in the USA, with enough public awareness and enough effort, they can probably get the infection rate below 1 per infected person. People may have to stop going to parties, and stop shaking hands, and many other things, but it seems likely that inside the USA they can keep it from having exponential growth.
There are treatments and vacines already. The usual 5 to 10 years to get licenses will be waved if enough white people are dying.
The real question is where will it have exponential growth. It seems it won't have exponential growth in all countries. In Africa they have customs like touching the dead, eating bushmeet, or not believing in germs, that contribute to the spread of ebola. In the West we have a much better chance that ebola does not have exponential growth. So it may well be the case that it doubles every month in parts of Africa but that in the USA it averages less than 1 person infected from each infected person and does not grow on its own inside the USA. If there is an infection rate each infected person on average infects 0.8 others, it won't have explosive exponential growth in the USA. But 1 person coming in might result in 5 people dying. So if there are 100,000 or 1 mil cases outside the USA, there could be over 1,000 people inside the USA that die. Note that the Mexican border is not checking temperatures for people who cross ilegally. If it becomes millions outside the USA then thousands inside is possible, even with a less than 1 infection rate.
Even if initially it has exponential growth in the USA, with enough public awareness and enough effort, they can probably get the infection rate below 1 per infected person. People may have to stop going to parties, and stop shaking hands, and many other things, but it seems likely that inside the USA they can keep it from having exponential growth.
There are treatments and vacines already. The usual 5 to 10 years to get licenses will be waved if enough white people are dying.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 guests