Two aid workers infected with the Ebola virus have been discharged from hospital

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28885753

by jdmitch • 12 years ago

66 45 12 years ago

bbc.co.uk

bellerocky• 12 years ago

I wonder if Brantly has now immunity or resistance and can help fight the disease without worry of reinfection. How does that work? Can you be reinfected with ebola if you survive?

codezero• 12 years ago

Survivors are believed to be more resistant but I think immunity is unlikely. Surely if he returns to risky areas he'll take the same precautions that anyone else would, it's not worth the risk and I'm sure those precautions are meant to protect from a number of tropical illnesses that are a risk in addition to Ebola.

azernik• 12 years ago

I don't remember which newspaper I read this in (I believe New York Times?) but apparently there are ~5 known varieties of Ebola, and recovering from an infection only grants immunity to that one variety.

So, in general, no, but if this outbreak involves only one strain they might be immune to that particular one.

s_q_b2• 12 years ago

According to the blood samples on 20 patients throughout West Africa, the current outbreak is a new strain. It is closely related to Ebola Zaire, but appears to have involved a different trans-species transmission event than the Zaire strain.

epaladin• 12 years ago

That's actually an interesting question- were you to theoretically be able to initial effect of Ebola infection, would the immune system eventually be able to create effective antibodies for it? I don't know if it would work the same way if you're introducing antibodies for treatment.

jwcooper• 12 years ago

According to the mashable article [1] linked in the comments one component of the serum had some extended protection in a series of tests:

"A November 2013 Defyrus study showed that ZMAb offered extended protection against the virus. Scientists reinfected surviving monkeys 10 weeks after their first infection, and 100% survived. What's more, four out of the six monkeys reinfected 13 weeks after initial exposure survived."

[1] http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/

goodcanadian2• 12 years ago

Ebola is a viral infection, so in theory, he should be immune or at least, strongly resistant to reinfection. According to wikipedia, there are four variant viruses that are thought to be disease causing in humans. I suspect that he would be much less resistant to the other three.

s_q_b2• 12 years ago

Right. But since the current outbreak is limited to a single strain, he should have an acquired immunity. However, he's probably more useful contributing as a research subject state-side, than a treatment specialist in West Africa, to say nothing of the physical and psychological health issues he's most likely still facing.

leishulang• 12 years ago

Heroes.

NathanCH• 12 years ago

I'm curious why you think that. Or did you mean the doctors that helped save them?

donsupreme• 12 years ago

If he was a doctor in AIDS ward, and got infected with HIV while caring for other sick patients, wouldn't he be considered a hero? He is a missionary doctor oversea, working in some of the poorest countries in the world, clearly not doing for the money. Believe it or not, people have been called heroes for doing a lot less than that.

ceejayoz2• 12 years ago

It's probably the "travel overseas to treat a deadly disease that has a history of killing lots of healthcare workers in shitty conditions" part.

rayiner2• 12 years ago

From the article:

[Brantly] said Ebola "was not on the radar" when he and his family moved to Liberia in October.

I wouldn't have been in Liberia in the first place, but if I had been, I would've been on the first plane out as soon as I even heard a rumor about an Ebola outbreak. He could have--the U.S. is aggressive in helping American citizens evacuate from situations like that. The fact he stayed and helped is what makes him a hero.

bertil• 12 years ago

There is a lot of litterature on what makes a hero -- somehone whose tale is worthy to be told and who should be admired for it. A Hero's journey has to be the classic few have actually read, but many know well enough to refer to:

* ideal world, left or destroyed (no matter the reason): he was living a confortable life in a developed country; whether you consider the catastrophy to be his departure or his discovery of the epidemic, both match;

* his actions have to be taxing, unexpected, foster his personal qualities and changed the hero's perspective: taking care of patients with a hemoragic fever is very daunting; he didn't come for that and had to learn how (from what would be the 'Fairy godmother' secondary charater, presumably an expert either local doctor or on hemoragic fevers); he didn't go there to catch the fever anyway;

* his goal must be clear and positive (aka the Princess, or the Treasure) and be slightly different than expected, to match the hero's own change: cure Ebola, or reach good health in the area; maybe have people die in dignity; he ended up being not a carer but a patient, too; might need a little more detail, but that part is pretty well covered;

* resolution must be positive (not necesarily for the hero who may die, but for the world): we have a known process to adress Ebola (with Western-grade medecine) and still the story not over (the 'and had many children' part, obviously 90% of the story, one where being a hero but not part of the narrow frame that makes a hero): we still need to eradicate the desease.

I would say his experience fits squarely within the heroic framework.

rayiner2• 12 years ago

More info on ZMapp, the experimental serum both patients were given: http://mashable.com/2014/08/17/ebola-serum-zmapp/

Also, this would make a great movie.

clebio3• 12 years ago

Is this just poor writing, or poor representation of the science? This article contradicts itself.

said in a statement that she was free of the virus but was significantly weakened.
There is no cure for Ebola, ...
But both Dr Brantly and Mrs Writebol received an experimental treatment known as ZMapp.
...it remains unclear if [ZMapp] is responsible for their recovery.

Is the virus in remission, or has it been eradicated from Writebol? If there is no cure, then it cannot have been eradicated. Maybe there's no _proven_ cure, in the sense of full medical trials?

In the 'poor writing' department (but unrelated to the above), the article also doesn't tell us who Franklin Graham is. This appears to be the only reference to the name:

...Franklin Graham said in a statement.

giarc• 12 years ago

There is not cure for Ebola like there is for other diseases. Ebola is a acute infection, meaning that if the body can fight it off, it leaves the body. Think of it like influenza. There is no cure, but once you get over it, there is no more influenza virus in your system.

They were given ZMapp, but they can't tell if that worked or not. Perhaps they would have overcome their illness without it.

They likely didn't say that the male was free of the virus because it has been shown that Ebola can be transmitted through semen of men for up to 7 weeks.

clebio3• 12 years ago

And, lest you think I'm daft, my _guess_ is that they mean the son of Billy Graham, but then perhaps the author should mention his tie to Samaritan's Purse.

001sky2• 12 years ago

“Nancy is free of the virus, but the lingering effects of the battle have left her in a significantly weakened condition,” her husband, David Writebol, said in a written statement. “Thus, we decided it would be best to leave the hospital privately to be able to give her the rest and recuperation she needs at this time.”

It sounds like she's weakened from not only fighting off the illness, but being bedridded etc for several weeks. The drugs may have also had side effects (that they don't want to publicise for PR purposes).

clebio3• 12 years ago

Downvotes are nice. Feedback is nicer.

lukeschlather• 12 years ago

The virus has a 60% mortality rate. According to the article, ZMapp has been given to 6 people, two of whom have recovered, 1 of whom has died, and 3 of whom may recover. Even if the remaining 3 recover, it's still too small a sample size to draw any conclusions.

jonnathanson• 12 years ago

At the very least, it seems like better coverage than I've encountered elsewhere.

I heard on the radio this morning, for instance, that "two people were cured of Ebola." "Cured" is a problematic statement for many reasons. First, because we don't really know to what degree the experimental treatment Brantly and Writebol received is responsible for their recovery. Second, because using the word "cured" implies that there is now a known remedy for the virus. There is not.

"If there is no cure, then it cannot have been eradicated."

Not necessarily. Brantly's DNA might carry some mutation or variant that provides him better natural defense against Ebola, for reasons we don't yet know. Perhaps the treatment he received worked in some way, directly or indirectly, in concert with another factor (or several). Perhaps he is just statistically lucky. What we do know is that Brantly received a course of treatment with ZMapp, and that Brantly recovered from the virus. In between those two facts are potentially dozens of confounding or hidden variables.

If anything, I give this writer a lot of credit for going through the trouble to point out that "it remains unclear if [ZMapp] is responsible for their recovery." Some other writers and outlets have not been as careful.

phkahler5• 12 years ago

I've been wondering about treating ebola with iodine. It's antimicrobial and antiviral. The Red Cross uses it to clean the skin before taking blood donations because it is superior to alcohol for cleaning. It is also useful to promote healing, among many other things (It seem to be helpful to the mitochondria which means wide-ranging benefit). But just due to the use for cleaning, and the aid in healing, I wonder if a few drops of Lugol's solution in a glass of water several times a day would help an ebola patient. That would hit right in the gut where the infection goes wild and does the most damage.

epochwolf• 12 years ago

The iodine used in cleaning skin causes all kinds of internal damage if ingested. See http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/symptoms-o...

phkahler5• 12 years ago

I'm not advocating concentrated iodine. A few drops of Lugol's mixed in a glass of water isn't going to damage anything - lots of people take that exact amount on a regular basis. We could argue about long term effects of that, but I'm talking about doing it for a week or two to help with something that is killing half the people it infects.

Where is the guy with iodine user id when you need them?

owenmarshall2• 12 years ago

That would hit right in the gut where the infection goes wild and does the most damage.

Ebola virus disease is not like c. difficile. It attacks endothelial cells, liver cells, phagocytes... it's as systemic as they come.

phkahler5• 12 years ago

> Ebola virus disease is not like c. difficile. It attacks endothelial cells, liver cells, phagocytes... it's as systemic as they come.

As are the benefits of iodine. But to be clear, you don't think it's worth even trying right?

ceejayoz2• 12 years ago

That would hit right in the gut where the infection goes wild and does the most damage.

Ebola goes wild and does the most damage in blood vessels, not the gut.

lazylester• 12 years ago

I just can't reconcile that a man of science (Brantly) credits magic ("God") for his recovery! Don't you get cognitive dissonance dude?

001sky2• 12 years ago

No offense but this is pretty common. Also, "in the field" you'd have a hard time differentiating a fairly-stochastic chance outcome (or 'luck') from a loaded die without a bit of infrastructure in place for your benefit. The two are probably related and nothing to get worked up about, IMHO.

Shivetya• 12 years ago

please note that when many people credit God they do not necessarily do for the act of curing them but for allowing them to be cured.

wehadfun• 12 years ago

There are a million things that had to go right for him to take the drug (no transportation problems, no attack, hospital didn't catch on fire, medicine didn't get compromised) science and Man control none of them. So it makes since that he thanked God.

Apocryphon• 12 years ago

I can't reconcile that men of science (internet atheists) can't comprehend other people (non-atheists) for being able to have seemingly contradictory beliefs. Do you think you're above cognitive dissonance yourself, dude?

mendort• 12 years ago

He probably also credits his doctors with enabling his recovery. And the drugs he took. And his own decision not to just give up and die. How can he possibly handle all these crazy contradictions?

Two aid workers infected with the Ebola virus have been discharged from hospital

Related Stories