At least 100 deaths reported in Ebola outbreak in DR Congo | Hacker News Reader

At least 100 deaths reported in Ebola outbreak in DR Congo

bbc.com

71 pointssaikatsg30 comments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundibugyo_ebolavirus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Ituri_Province_Ebola_epid...

As I am not an expert on this subject, what is it about this part of the world that seems to be a hotbed for Ebola and what, if anything, can local governments do to reduce its likelihood of reoccurring?

People eat the reservoir species for these diseases in these areas. Not much local government can do about something that has been done for all of human history. Can't exactly tell a hungry person capable of hunting for themselves to stop hunting for themselves and go without.

I agree, but it's more complicated.

Some people in the developed world like to collect mushroom, and when someone misidentify one of them can have a horrible death.

I guess some of the hunter would say:

fake quote> The morons can't get their own food and must pay someone to fish in a barrel for them.

Anyway, I agree that the lot of rules that farmer and butchers must follow improve a lot the safety of the meat we eat.

It's hard to dismiss a population's drive to eat out of hunger. When its survival is at stake sometimes there is no choice but to hunt and eat what is available. It's hard to choose between animal's survival and your own survival.

Those hotspot areas are notoriously infamous for government coups and instability being commonplace. Even so, if a large percentage of the world population is at risk, then I would hope that friendly regional authorities would have enough forethought and common sense to, at least, find alternative methods of feeding their population, including asking for help.

I totally get that there are places where "authoritarian regimes and dictatorships or fragile and failed states," standby and do nothing, because it is in their interest or corruption is the norm. But even so, being a continuous obstacle, or an indirect cause to a potential world catastrophe, be it natural or man-made while willingly refusing to do something about it, should carry permanent, serious and long-lasting consequences for any government found to be negligent.

Not trying to make lite of this situation, but in cases like these, the needs of the many must truly outweigh the needs of the, corrupt few.

Thank you for letting me in!

Sol Roth

PS:

Hope you like the décor. I’m redecorating your thoughts permanently.

> what is it about this part of the world that seems to be a hotbed for Ebola

Utter poverty. No money for wastewater and freshwater treatment, no money to pay for good food instead of hunting wild game and properly (!) processing and storing it, no money to pay for healthcare and basic hygienic supplies, no money to pay for proper housing to keep pests away.

In other diseases, even modern Western countries aren't far away from serious issues if even one of these preconditions collapses. Homeless encampments are a persistent source of nasty bugs, you get water boil-off orders after damages to the tap water systems for similar reasons, and hell Covid showed how vulnerable we are to supply chain interruptions for basic PPE.

It also doesn't help the game species that are hunted are a lot closer to ourselves in relation than many other typical game species elsewhere in the world. Much more likely for zoonotic spillover.

In a globalized society, all of this is downstream of a dysfunctional economic system, which itself is downstream of the misplaced priorities of the countries with the most power. Speaking out of my ass, but I'd bet that the amount of money spent on wars by 5 certain countries over the past 5 years could have been used to eradicate Ebola. But we chose one use for all of that time and energy, and not the other, so here we are.

>>Outbreaks between people start when somebody catches Ebola from an infected animal

>>It spreads through infected bodily fluids, such as blood and vomit.

Can someone please educate me on how ebola is spreading? are these 100 deaths because of virus transmission from infected animals or from humans? if from humans - then how is it spreading given that it spreads via blood and vomit.

> then how is it spreading given that it spreads via blood and vomit.

Water, mostly. Bad sanitation is one of the major drivers behind most if not all epidemics. If you don't have clean water to drink because your wells are contaminated with fecal matter, you're screwed. The sick contaminate the environment for everyone else.

Look up “African dry sex”. Sorry.

A handful get infected from direct exposure to animals. Then it spreads to family and others in the community. Sometimes people travel and bring it to a new location. Sadly, it is often the caregivers who get infected.

> * how is it spreading given that it spreads via blood and vomit*

Note that this isn’t the Zaire ebolavirus. We’re still pinning down specifics.

> Can someone please educate me on how ebola is spreading? are these 100 deaths because of virus transmission from infected animals or from humans?

Human to human.

Its not only "blood and vomit", it is any bodily fluid, so you also have sweat, saliva, breast milk and semen.

So you therefore have bedding, clothing, or medical equipment soiled with infected fluids.

And preparation of the body after death.

Bearing in mind viral load (concentration of Ebola in bodily fluids) is often high, so it does not take much.

In addition, delayed diagnosis is not uncommon.

Access to and adherence to infection control can easily be a problem.

So, in essence you have various routes to amplification of spread.

thanks for the explanations. BBC's line is so confusing; i thought semen and breast milk would be the key reasons but they wrote 'bodily fluids such as blood and vomit' and I just couldn't figure out how it was transmitting through vomit.

>Zero comments half-an-hour later, despite being on the front page

That tracks.

I mean, it's a sad story but I'm not entirely sure I have much to say about it. I doubt I'm unique.

People figure out things to say about topics they care about. But the kind of person who comes to HN doesn't care about the DRC, so yeah, not much commentary. Not surprised, just disappointed. If such people also dislike being called out for their concern, that's kind of them to reconcile.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com