From Jerry Pournelle's website: http://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/

Jerry asked a contributor to his site to summarise what we currently know about Ebola:

Quote:

There are now 6 known strains, counting the one that has been dubbed Guinea:

Guinea ~70% fatal –> research papers in April of this year identify this with the current West African outbreak; general death rates seem to corroborate this.

Zaire ~90% fatal.

Sudan ~70%

Bundibugyo ~35-40%

Reston ~0%

Tai Forest/Cote d’Ivoire ~~mostly animal; some researchers have developed it; human fatality rates not known; does not always present with hemorrhage

These have different fatality rates, with the most serious being Zaire, at 90% fatal. Reston appears not to infect humans, or at least not to be symptomatic in humans. Reston may also be airborne. Guinea is also in a different clade from any of the other strains. (clade: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clade) Classification is order Mononegavirales, family Filoviridae, genus Ebolavirus. Related to the Marburgvirus; may have diverged from a common ancestor. Mutation rate only about 25% of e.g. influenza virus.

If I read the papers correctly, Guinea developed separately from the other strains. This may or may not mean that it mutated from the original ancestor of the Ebolavirus and Marburgvirus independently of the other Ebola strains, which IIRC are all in the same clade.

Symptoms per CDC:

* Fever

* Severe headache

* Muscle pain

* Weakness

* Diarrhea

* Vomiting

* Abdominal (stomach) pain

* Unexplained hemorrhage (bleeding or bruising)

The UV as presented by the Sun would be insufficient to kill Ebola dried on a surface, and wholly insufficient to kill Ebola in liquid suspension, because next to no UVC reaches past the atmosphere. A UV light at a distance of 6-12" will kill the majority of Ebola, which is more sensitive to UVC than models indicated, but there will be 3-4% residue that is UV-resistant. Other solar wavebands may be as, or more, effective, but I’ve not been able to find research on it.

Symptoms may appear anywhere from 2 to 21 days after exposure to Ebola, but the average is 8 to 10 days. There is some evidence that indicates that some strains, in some people, have an incubation period up to some 42 days, or twice the maximum. This has, to my knowledge, not been proven.

Internally, victims’ tissues begin to break down, resulting in widespread hemorrhage. This hemorrhage escapes the body through available orifices (mouth, eyes, ears, nose, rectum, and any puncture wound such as provided for an IV). As the disease progresses, explosive diarrhea and projectile vomiting can be complicated by seizures. The waste material temporarily aerosolizes the virus present in the feces and vomitus, making anyone in the vicinity susceptible to contamination. The numbers I’m hearing most bruited about indicate that infection is possible if only 1-10 viruses are introduced into the body.

Insofar as is known, the Zaire strain, at least, is not a true aerosol virus. It is aerosolized during vomiting and defecating in the same fashion as one might aerosolize a liquid in a pump spray bottle; it will eventually settle out onto local surfaces. This does, however, naturally "weaponize" the virus (though not as effectively as, say, a fine powder of anthrax). One way to truly weaponize the virus would be to take a victim’s blood, dry it, and powder it to a sufficient level of fineness that the particles can become suspended in air, then disperse it in air in a population-dense area. [I'm not sure you want to publish that last bit though.]

This is all I can think of at the moment.

I want to emphasize that my degrees are not in biology, let alone epidemiology. However, by dint of the broad range of degrees I have, I was at one time my organization’s resident expert in what was then called NBC (Nuclear Biological Chemical) weapons tech and effects. (I think they call it CBRN now: Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear.) So I know enough to be able to interpret the papers, by and large, and determine the implications and effects thereof.

Stephanie Osborn

Interstellar Woman of Mystery

http://www.Stephanie-Osborn.com <http://www.stephanie-osborn.com/>

Unquote.

RedToo.

Man have I got some deals for you for hotels in Sierra Leone !

I'm not an expert, but weaponizing it does not seem very practical. It's easy to explain how it might be done, but this requires a plan that is usually not really proposed. Culturing it safely in a controlled way would require very sophisticated means. Are terrorists just going to travel to these areas and pick up an infected corpse or bodily fluids from one and haul it back with them without infecting themselves? This assumes an awful lot without really explaining the process in practice, it's just saying something like, "one way to do it is get it, grind it into a powder, and then spread it over a large city." That's just easier said than done. I'm sure anyone even thinking of doing this has that figured out. What they haven't figured out is how to actually get in possession of it and handle it, and actually carry out such a plan.

You are forgetting the suicide bomber aspect of modern day terrorists.If one believes that god has 73 virgins waiting for them in heaven if they kill infidels then its rather easy to see them going to Africa,get contaminated and then head to America.Blow yourself up or bleed out till death is easy stuff for these sickos.

No, it's not a proper analogy. And that's why you see more suicide bombers than terrorists armed with Ebola laden planes or whatnot.

The prep work is so much different. Furthermore, a suicide bomber does not spread anything within their own group, even undermining the health of its own cause. You could almost make the case of that even permitting the group to get a hold of it is a threat in itself even to them. They are contaminating themselves, or running the risk of contamination just by acquiring it.

Hahaha