Think you had a bad day at work?

[Taem]

Here's a quickie for you all; I saw this article and couldn't help but share it. I'm just glad this is not my line of work:

Experimental Ebola Vaccine Used on Human
Friday, March 27, 2009
Associated Press

BERLIN — It's a nightmare scenario worthy of a sci-fi movie script: A scientist accidentally pricks her finger with a needle used to inject the deadly Ebola virus into lab mice.

But in this case, it really happened — to an unidentified 45-year-old woman in Germany.

Within hours of the accident on March 12, several of the scientist's colleagues held a trans-Atlantic telephone conference to map out a way to save her life.

Within 24 hours, an experimental vaccine — never before tried on humans — was on its way to Germany from a lab in Canada.

Within 40 hours, the at-risk scientist was injected with the vaccine.

So far, so good. If the woman is still healthy on April 2, she can consider herself safe.

It's not a 100 percent certainty the researcher was actually infected with Ebola.

If she doesn't become infected, scientists may not know if it was the vaccine, or luck.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Here's a quickie for you all; I saw this article and couldn't help but share it. I'm just glad this is not my line of work:

Interesting. It brings up a question that I've long had but never bothered to research.

I understand, more or less, how a prophylactic vaccine works in terms of exposing the immune system to a diminished threat in order to generate a resistance to a greater threat. What I don't understand is how a vaccine works that is administered (as in this case) to someone who has been already exposed to the greater threat. A quick google failed to bring up anything particularly useful, and Wiki let me down.

So, if anyone has a good link or an explanation they are willing to type, I'd appreciate the info.

Thanks.

--Pete

[eppie]

Hi,
Interesting. It brings up a question that I've long had but never bothered to research.

I understand, more or less, how a prophylactic vaccine works in terms of exposing the immune system to a diminished threat in order to generate a resistance to a greater threat. What I don't understand is how a vaccine works that is administered (as in this case) to someone who has been already exposed to the greater threat. A quick google failed to bring up anything particularly useful, and Wiki let me down.

So, if anyone has a good link or an explanation they are willing to type, I'd appreciate the info.

Thanks.

--Pete

But is it said this vaccine was prophylactic?

Also I think the effect that it has on the human body does not say all about the 'strength' of the virus. It might be killed by a vaccine made with a far less dangerous species.

I am not an expert on these kind of things though.

[--Pete]

Hi,

But is it said this vaccine was prophylactic?

No, it was not said. The fact that it was administered after her (supposed) exposure would seem to indicate that it was not prophylactic.

Also I think the effect that it has on the human body does not say all about the 'strength' of the virus. It might be killed by a vaccine made with a far less dangerous species.

Not entirely sure what you mean by this. It is my understanding that the way vaccines work (and what defines vaccines as opposed to other pharmaceuticals) is that they stimulate the immune system into producing antibodies. How the vaccine is generated and what class of threats any antibody protects one from are interesting but moot for my question. If the mechanism is that controlled exposure kicks immune system into generating antibodies which prepare the defense against uncontrolled exposure, then how can a controlled exposure *after* an uncontrolled exposure help? Wouldn't the immune system already be working on developing and generating the necessary antibodies?

I am not an expert on these kind of things though.

Me neither. Many more questions than answers. Not only am I ignorant, but even worse, I'm probably mis-informed.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

So, if anyone has a good link or an explanation they are willing to type, I'd appreciate the info.

My understanding is that *real* viruses start small but hijack the transcript RNA mechanisms within the cell which convert the cells proteins into virus copies and flood the body hyper-exponentially over time (e.g. each cell infected releases 1000's of copies of the virus when the cell wall explodes). When you get a shot of vaccine, it is a massive amount of antigen stimulating compound. So, you are right in that before or earlier is better, otherwise you are behind the viral load of the *real* virus. It's so hot that it will do its damage before the immune system can get up to speed. Ebola attacks the epithelial lining of blood vessels and destroys platelets doing the double damage of ripping apart your circulatory system while also preventing clotting.

http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/topics/ebolaMa...efault.htm

I would add that there are only a few diseases on this planet that truly terrify me, they are Ebola/Marburg, Dengue, SARS, Pneumonic plague and Cholera. Oh, and that flesh eating streptococcal bacteria...

[--Pete]

Hi,

My understanding is that *real* viruses start small but hijack the transcript RNA mechanisms within the cell which convert the cells proteins into virus copies and flood the body hyper-exponentially over time

Following the link you gave led me to this nice pamphlet. While it does not seem to address the exact question I asked, it does seem to give a lot of information at about the level I was looking for. So far, I've only skimmed it, but I'll give it a deeper read later.

When you get a shot of vaccine, it is a massive amount of antigen stimulating compound. So, you are right in that before or earlier is better, otherwise you are behind the viral load of the *real* virus.

OK, so that helps to explain how a vaccine can help in the case of a slow working virus. The immune system gets kick started before the real virus can spread, and so when it does start to spread the system can keep it down better. Would be good for, say, rabies (but why the boosters?). But how would it be able to do much for something as fast as Ebola?

--Pete

[--Pete]

Hi,

Replying to the same post twice -- shame on me. But this just occurred to me after speaking with my mother this morning. And it is sufficiently removed from the previous post that a simple edit wouldn't do (at least for me).

I would add that there are only a few diseases on this planet that truly terrify me, they are Ebola/Marburg, Dengue, SARS, Pneumonic plague and Cholera. Oh, and that flesh eating streptococcal bacteria...

After reading your list, I realized that none of my fears are really reflected here. I don't particularly fear death, though some processes of dieing are preferable to others. The things I really fear are loss of vision and loss of my mind. And of the two, loss of my mind is the big one. I'd much sooner die, even of some of the diseases you named, than live with dementia. Of course, if I do go crazy, I might just change my mind;)

--Pete

[Kevin]

The things I really fear are loss of vision and loss of my mind. And of the two, loss of my mind is the big one. I'd much sooner die, even of some of the diseases you named, than live with dementia. Of course, if I do go crazy, I might just change my mind;)

--Pete

I can not agree with you more on this. And depending on how you lose your mind, it makes it even worse. The issues I went through there were times I felt very much like I was not in control of myself. The panic attacks were so severe, I had episodes of blackout, there were times where I literally couldn't make myself move my limbs even though I wanted to. I still have days were I can not make myself get in the shower (that's the last lingering effect thankfully). Not being able to control your own actions is horrible. It's the biggest fear I have now, reverting even a little to how things were before. I could not handle it again.

I realize that many folks don't know the full extent of what I went though, hell no one knows. I'm the only one that was there for every issue that happened, but yeah, if I lose my mind, I want it lost completely. Anything else is the worst experience I can imagine now.

[swirly]

Wouldn't the immune system already be working on developing and generating the necessary antibodies?

Pure conjecture, but this assumption could be false. I could see it as possible that a virus like ebola is so deadly because it does not trigger the right immune response. It may trigger the wrong response or too weak of a response. If this is the case then a vaccine could be developed that when injected triggers the correct response or a stronger response. No idea what the actual case is, but this seems like a reasonable theory to me.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Pure conjecture, but this assumption could be false. I could see it as possible that a virus like ebola is so deadly because it does not trigger the right immune response. It may trigger the wrong response or too weak of a response. If this is the case then a vaccine could be developed that when injected triggers the correct response or a stronger response. No idea what the actual case is, but this seems like a reasonable theory to me.

Interesting idea. Don't know about Ebola, but it does remind me of something I read about the difficulty of treating HIV/AIDS. Because they attack the immune system, the defender becomes the target and cannot defend the remainder of the body.

I might just have to research this whole topic some more.

--Pete

[Concillian]

And of the two, loss of my mind is the big one. I'd much sooner die, even of some of the diseases you named, than live with dementia. Of course, if I do go crazy, I might just change my mind;)

After seeing my Grandmother decline over the years, I've come to the conclusion that losing your mind effectively IS dying. Your body isn't technically dead, but as a person, you're dead.

[kandrathe]

That list would be the particularly gruesome deaths and especially those that can take you faster than medical personnel can figure out and treat. Cancer offers up a pantheon of particularly slow and painful or gruesome deaths as well.

Ebola/Marburg -- bleed to death from every orifice in your body 1 - 4 days
Dengue -- very painful, and bright red itchy rash all over your body. Not as lethal, just really painful.
SARS -- Pneumonic plague -- or another similar one is Hantavirus -- Lung infection, and suffocate in a day.
Cholera -- terminal diarrhea within a few hours

-- there is another gruesome one I remember that interrupts cell wall function that causes cells throughout the body to rupture.

[Hammerskjold]

SARS -- Pneumonic plague -- or another similar one is Hantavirus -- Lung infection, and suffocate in a day.

I've got some potentially good news for you. Unless you happen to be in the following list:

- Nurses\doctors or anyone who work in the frontline situations of a hospital\ICUs on a daily basis.
- The very young or the very old.
- Someone who already have a seriously compromised health due to sickness or injury, and or
happen to be in a hospital \ ICUs.

You probably don't need to be losing that much sleep over suffocating from SARS.

No, I'm not a doctor, or a scientician. This is just my 2 cents, earned from living through the Toronto SARS experience around 2003. And not from my couch watching it on TV, or the innernets. (Well Ok, I actually did all of the above. For the big scarytime show I tuned into the TV. I even saw our idiot of a mayor at the time on Larry King. Making as usual, a big idiot of himself.)

I happened to 'luck' into an unexpected first row seats to the whole thing. One of my family member had to go in for surgery, right in the middle of the SARS outbreak. We had to go to one of the few hospitals downtown that can still do surgeries at the time, because every other hospital was virtually in quarantine.

We survived just fine, including the family member who had the surgery. Which was the biggest worry we had at the time.

Now, I want to make something clear here. I'm not downplaying the dangers of any disease like SARS. But some of the dangers I experienced with SARS, almost had nothing to do with SARS itself. It was less 'Outbreak' with Dustin Hoffman, and more the first 3/4 of 'Jaws'. Even if they were out of the water, some people were still screaming SARS!!11 :rolleyes:I mean SHARKS!!111

In my rusty steeltrap memory, it went something like this.

- Ignorance when SARS was first suspected, then send in the clowns. These are usually people of official capacity who sometimes doesn't know much medically, and sometimes doesn't know about anything. Just bureaucrats in the worst sense of the word. They can then alternate between talking down to people like they're toddlers, and showing a display of boobery rivaled only by a Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction. After the official clown has done the first act, the freelance amateurs try to follow. Usually they're carrying their own microphones and have better make-up department. They might not have all the facts yet, but by gads they got opinions! But it's just a warm up act compared to what's coming up next.

- Enter the lovely and talented, Miss-Information! She's usually followed around by the Fear-Addict, and Chicken Little. And her bitchay twin sister, Rumours. Miss-Information is not really malicious, she's more ignorant than anything else, and sometimes she tries to learn from her mistakes. It's just that she's oblivious to a lot of harm her actions can bring to any situation. Poor Miss-Information is often used by Fear-Addict, Chicken Little, and Rumours for their own purpose. Miss-Information does keep up with the latest in technology, and she can be found on the Interweb near you. But this show isn't all just about fun and games. Because please give a warm welcome to our next performer.

- Emergence of the Emergency Enterpreneurs. You want an N95 mask to keep that nasty SARS away?
50$. For one. 500$ for a box of 10. Aw hell, I like your face, make it an even 400$. Good deal, regular price at regular times is probably around 5-10 bucks max, for a pack of 2, but those times ain't now. And they're all sold out by now anyway. And how much is your life, and your loved ones life is worth, are you going to cheap out on them, or yourself? I also got some special anti-SARS soap if you're interested in a combo pack.

- Time for some edutainment break. Now it's important to repeat this as loudly and as often as we can. The word of the day is, Epidemic! Doesn't matter if not all the facts are in, it's an Epidemic! Act like the world is being stalked by a biblical-sized Pestilence, because it still might be, an Epidemic! Hooray! Are you safe in your home with your loved ones with nary a cough, well -do- worry, because it's a, what is it folks? Epidemic! Yay!

- If we're lucky, someone will emerge who has a good head on their shoulder to try to manage the circus. In our case, it was this IMO, great woman.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...asrur-obit.html

When some people were worried about how the SHARK will negatively impact the upcoming long weekend beach celebration, or severely downplaying the situation, or severely up-playing the situation. This woman managed a not so minor miracle. She spoke with calm and clarity, and honesty, and somehow or other most people responded with trust. And because no good deed goes unpunished, she later got cancer. Some of the clowns who did not have her kind of mettle, seems to be living cancer free thus far. That coffee mug I saw was right. Life's a biatch.

- And now, the final act. SARS retreated (it didn't die, way too valuable as a Fear Franchise). The world did not collapse, civilization somehow survived this latest Epidemic. (LOVE that word!)
Let's make sure we learn all the valuable lessons this crisis brought, because it's been paid for in real lives lost. To not do so would mean the deaths that did happen due to negligence, ignorance, incompetence, will all be in vain. Those things probably took more lives than SARS did, at least in Toronto 2003. Sometimes it's the indirect hit that causes the most damage.

Nah...it's more fun yelling SHARKS!11


In any case here's some links that may or may not be of interest.

A dry academic read, seriously who reads these things, the people in charge? Pfft. Way too boring.
http://www.yorku.ca/igreene/sars.html

A slightly more entertaining magazine link.
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ind...ams=M1SEC705401

And the most entertaining of all.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...b=Entertainment

[kandrathe]

I'm not so much afraid of catching it, as I am of actually having it and suffering.

All of the ones I listed are almost unheard of in my part of the world.

[--Pete]

Hi,

. . . Nah...it's more fun yelling SHARKS!11 . . .

Now that was a GREAT post. Thank you.

--Pete

[Kylearan]

Hi,

The things I really fear are loss of vision and loss of my mind.

While I fear loss of mind the most as well, I've always wondered why so many people fear loss of vision more than loss of hearing. I realize one cannot really argue about one's fears, but why is vision more important to you than hearing?

WIth loss of vision, access to written texts becomes more difficult. By using audio books, automatic reading systems and Braille, this can be compensated for - partially, at least. You also lose some orientation and mobility, but again there are ways to get around this. To me, the biggest loss here would be the ability to play games, and sports - there's not a lot you can do against this.

If you lose the ability to hear, you might still be able to do most of the above - but your ability for real life social interaction gets severely limited. By learning to read from lips, you can still do one-on-one conversations, and I guess learning ASL would open up a larger community for you to communicate with. However, you will no longer be able to take part in conversations with your family and friends like you did before, and even if they give their best to try to include you, the flow of conversation would be slowed down and disrupted so much that I suspect life will become a lot lonelier than before.

That I enjoy hearing music much more than watching TV or something beautiful in general is another reason why I'd rather lose vision than hearing, but that's probably even more subjective than my thoughts above.;)

-Kylearan

[--Pete]

Hi,

I realize one cannot really argue about one's fears, but why is vision more important to you than hearing?

I agree, one cannot argue, but one can discuss. Which is worse is not objective, but subjective and depends on what we value.

To some extent my fear of losing my vision is caused by the difficulties of the last four years during which I've had from poor to almost no vision. Over much of the last four years, I have not been able to drive, to watch TV (although I did listen to it), to play computer games (still not completely able), to read (and so, to follow fora, etc.). While I suspect that some of those limitations could be overcome, most cannot be.

While losing my hearing is not something I'd want, I do not think that it would have such a great effect on my life. TV is broadcast (mostly) with subtitles, most computer games can be played with the sound turned off anyway, the written word does not need hearing to be enjoyed, one can drive without hearing, and so fourth. The social interactions are made more difficult when one is deaf; I know that because of my father. But the opportunity for social interactions is, I think, reduced more by the inability to get around that blindness causes than by the deafness.

So, admitting that it is my opinion and subjective, I still fear blindness much more than deafness. Not arguing, just exploring my viewpoint.

-Pete

[Nystul]

I love playing music and listening to it, but trying to live a functional life without my glasses would be a lot tougher than losing my hearing. My work requires vision. I am mostly a visual learner. TV has closed captioning, and the internet is mostly a visual medium. Being able to see where you are walking is a nice thing. Social life would be rough either way. Diablo can be played without sound easier than without picture. I think we are a very vision reliant species in general.