Zika virus has 'explosive pandemic potential'

RobertKK

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35425731

US scientists have urged the World Health Organisation to take urgent action over the Zika virus, which they say has "explosive pandemic potential".
Writing in a US medical journal, they called on the WHO to heed lessons from the Ebola outbreak and convene an emergency committee of disease experts.
They said a vaccine might be ready for testing in two years but it could be a decade before it is publicly available.
Zika, linked to shrunken brains in children, has caused panic in Brazil.
Thousands of people have been infected there and it has spread to some 20 countries.

Some of the advice being given in affected countries is: women shouldn't become pregnant for two years given the risk.
Pregnant women warned not to travel infected regions.

The Zika virus was first discovered in monkeys in the Zika forest in Uganda in 1947 and the first human case was in Nigeria in 1954. Then cases in Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia in 1977/78, then Micronesia in 2007, French Polynesia in 2013 and now in South America since 2015.

It is believed some of the cases of Zika virus have been sexually transmitted.

Not great for pregnant women, or people in general or for Brazil and the Olympics with this virus out of control at the moment, with pandemic potential.
Will this turn into another Ebola disaster but without the death toll?

smash

So wait, WW parody article could be real?

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2016/01/27/fashion-is-the-zika-virus-the-new-ebola/

anothernight

It's primarily transmitted by mosquitoes, of which there aren't many in this part of the world. The symptoms are manageable in adults and it's not usually lethal. Meh, we'll be fine.

RobertKK

RobertKK wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35425731



Some of the advice being given in affected countries is: women shouldn't become pregnant for two years given the risk.
Pregnant women warned not to travel infected regions.

The Zika virus was first discovered in monkeys in the Zika forest in Uganda in 1947 and the first human case was in Nigeria in 1954. Then cases in Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia in 1977/78, then Micronesia in 2007, French Polynesia in 2013 and now in South America since 2015.

It is believed some of the cases of Zika virus have been sexually transmitted.

Not great for pregnant women, or people in general or for Brazil and the Olympics with this virus out of control at the moment, with pandemic potential.
Will this turn into another Ebola disaster but without the death toll?

Sorry just to correct this. There has been one report of possible spread of Zika through sexual contact, and one report of possible spread through a blood transfusion.

There isn't enough evidence to believe anything about it's transmission from an isolated and as yet barely investigated case.

The Backwards Man

Another argument for killing all the mosquitoes. Mosquitoes kill more people every year than any other animal, even people.

Gaoth Laidir

It's been a while since we had the ebola virus so it is time for the next phase of scaremongering. Why not focus on Brazil, given that the Olympics will be there this year.

In 3 out of 4 people this virus causes NO symptoms. They don't even know they have it. In others the symptoms are flu-like. And there is no evidence to suggest that it is passed from person to person, only by mosquitos. Listen back to the doctor on Morning Ireland this morning, this is what he said.

I don't remember any big scare during previous events (mentioned above). Why not?

Candie

Candie wrote: »

Sorry just to correct this. There has been one report of possible spread of Zika through sexual contact, and one report of possible spread through a blood transfusion.

There isn't enough evidence to believe anything about it's transmission from an isolated and as yet barely investigated case.

Tried explaining that to someone but they had their mind made up. It was on the news apparently.

The Backwards Man

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

It's been a while since we had the ebola virus so it is time for the next phase of scaremongering. Why not focus on Brazil, given that the Olympics will be there this year.

In 3 out of 4 people this virus causes NO symptoms. They don't even know they have it. And there is no evidence to suggest that it is passed from person to person, only by mosquitos. Listen back to the doctor on Morning Ireland this morning, this is what he said.

I don't remember any big scare during previous events (mentioned above). Why not?

It's the damage to unborn babies link that's causing the panic this time, but I don't think that has even been definitively proven yet.

eeguy

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Another argument for killing all the mosquitoes. Mosquitoes kill more people every year than any other animal, even people.

Mosquitos breed in water.

We should poison all the water. That'll show them!

It's not spread from person to person (as far as we know) generally, although there is some evidence to suggest it can be passed in late pregnancy albeit very infrequently if at all. As distinct from the effect on a developing fetus when a pregnant mother is infected.

The Backwards Man

eeguy wrote: »

Mosquitos breed in water.

We should poison all the water. That'll show them!

The Yanks have being doing that for years. Way ahead of their time yet again.

RobertKK

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

It's been a while since we had the ebola virus so it is time for the next phase of scaremongering. Why not focus on Brazil, given that the Olympics will be there this year.

In 3 out of 4 people this virus causes NO symptoms. They don't even know they have it. In others the symptoms are flu-like. And there is no evidence to suggest that it is passed from person to person, only by mosquitos. Listen back to the doctor on Morning Ireland this morning, this is what he said.

I don't remember any big scare during previous events (mentioned above). Why not?

How many people were affected/infected elsewhere?

22 countries in the Americas have the virus now, it seems to be spreading fast.

btw when cattle and sheep here in Europe were getting the Schmallenberg virus spread by midges, the drugs companies found a vaccine for the animals.
It caused pregnant cattle and sheep (depending on stage of pregnancy) to have deformed offspring, which would not live, they couldn't stand, twisted necks. I had two cases.
The animals became immune to the virus once infected.
Wonder if humans who are infected with Zika virus become immune and will we get a vaccine as quickly for Zika virus as quickly as the animals did for Schmallenberg?

Human trials on the Zika vaccine are a couple of years off and it'll be up to ten years before it's available as things stand.

However once the great white public are at risk it's likely to move faster. All it took was a few Europeans to be infected with Ebola for the vaccine to get the priority it should always have had.

AllGunsBlazing

So this is what we're going to be panicking about in 2016? I had been wondering.

AllGunsBlazing

AllGunsBlazing wrote: »

So this is what we're going to be panicking about in 2016? I had been wondering.

If you're a newly pregnant woman or father to be, and have recently been or live in the danger zone, then yes. You'd be panicking.

I can't imagine the stress this is going to put people under.

The_Valeyard

Candie wrote: »

If you're a newly pregnant woman or father to be, and have recently been or live in the danger zone, then yes. You'd be panicking.

I can't imagine the stress this is going to put people under.

Id say pregnancy is stressful and scary enough without this all added onto it!

Luckily from what ive understood from the news, the European case involved a woman who just travelled back from South America, not that the European mosquitoes are currently carrying this infection.

my main worry would be the people travelling to and from the 2016 Rio Olympics, the last thing we need is for this virus to mutate or jump transmission wise and become a global issue.

gctest50

RobertKK wrote: »

......
22 countries in the Americas have the virus now, it seems to be spreading fast....

It's doing well for itself :

Experts from European countries traced records of Zika cases as early as Mar. 2015. Britain confirmed five while the Netherlands 10, all of which were infected after travelling from South America.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/23/zika-virus-three-uk-travellers-diagnosed

sbsquarepants

Yawn yawn yawn - another year another virus coming to kill us all.

Not worth worrying about - it could happen that some virus comes along and wipes out half of humanity, but if it does, it does - we are not in any way capable of stopping it so no point fretting.

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

It's doing well for itself :



http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/23/zika-virus-three-uk-travellers-diagnosed

The virus isn't like Ebola, it's not (as far as anyone can tell, and there is no evidence to suggest) spread from person to person without the medium of a mosquito. People arriving in countries already infected aren't a danger to others, they're not spreading it.

gctest50

Candie wrote: »

The virus isn't like Ebola, it's not (as far as anyone can tell, and there is no evidence to suggest) spread from person to person without the medium of a mosquito. People arriving in countries already infected aren't a danger to others, they're not spreading it.

dunno

Furthermore, patients 1 and 3 reported having vaginal sexual intercourse in the days after patient 1 returned home but before the onset of his clinical illness. It is reasonable to suspect that infected semen may have passed from patient 1 to patient 3 during coitus. Another possibility is that direct contact and exchange of other bodily fluids, such as saliva, could have resulted in ZIKV transmission, but illness did not develop in the 4 children of patients 1 and 3 during this time.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3321795/

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

dunno

These are suspicions to be investigated. It's not evidence. As things stand there's no evidence to be concerned about transmission from casual contact.

cowboyBuilder

It is only dangerous for pregnant women, and the mozzies aren't gonna turn up in Europe - have malaria infected mozzies ever done so ?

So it is scaremongering - but obviously very serious for the people in the area wanting to get pregnant.

c_man

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Yawn yawn yawn - another year another virus coming to kill us all.

Exactly. People will get into a tizzy panicking about some far off limited outbreak, all the while ignoring the multitude of diseases, cancers and illnesses they are far, far more likely to get.

eeguy

c_man wrote: »

Exactly. People will get into a tizzy panicking about some far off limited outbreak, all the while ignoring the multitude of diseases, cancers and illnesses they are far, far more likely to get.

Hundreds of column inches, hype, speculation and panic dedicated to a virus that will kill far less than the flu.

arayess

makes you thankful living ireland and our ****ty climate.
we tend to be immune to these wonder-illnesses that crop up

read a few reports from brazil , seems like a terrible tragedy.
made me really sad reading about it and the pictures.

07Lapierre

eeguy wrote: »

Mosquitos breed in water.

We should poison all the water. That'll show them!

May we should put fluoride in our drinking water?

c_man

eeguy wrote: »

Hundreds of column inches, hype, speculation and panic dedicated to a virus that will kill far less than the flu.

Yep. Don't forget the inevitable questions about "Is Ireland prepared for <insert scary disease>?" being thrown at politicians, the HSE and filling up a good chunk of the news for a while. This will generate even more panic among the public and a clamber for something to be done.

Meanwhile 10,000 Irish people will die in the year from cardiovascular disease, and 1 in 3 of us will get some form of cancer in our lifetime.

Howard the Duck

c_man wrote: »

Yep. Don't forget the inevitable questions about "Is Ireland prepared for <insert scary disease>?" being thrown at politicians, the HSE and filling up a good chunk of the news for a while. This will generate even more panic among the public and a clamber for something to be done.

Meanwhile 10,000 Irish people will die in the year from cardiovascular disease, and 1 in 3 of us will get some form of cancer in our lifetime.

What do you want people to do? ignore the 1000s of children who will be born with a terrible disease?One city in Brazil went from 5 cases of microcephaly a year to 300 in the last 6 months .Some of the comments in here are unbelievable and clearly people aren't even bothering to read about it before commenting. This is something that needs urgent action.
There should be a clamber for something to be done about this, a vaccine is urgently needed.
Also last time i checked there is millions being spent on cancer research and other diseases.

eeguy

Howard the Duck wrote: »

What do you want people to do? ignore the 1000s of children who will be born with a terrible disease?One city in Brazil went from 5 cases of microcephaly a year to 300 in the last 6 months

That's fair enough, but it's in a country on the far side of the world with a different climate. We're nowhere near as susceptible as Brazil.
I'm moaning about the usual tabloid over reaction to these stories, with headlines like "IS IRELAND PREPARED" "SHOULD BORDERS BE CLOSED" "MIDGET GETS ATTACKED AFTER ZIKA VIRUS MISTAKE"

Howard the Duck

eeguy wrote: »

That's fair enough, but it's in a country on the far side of the world with a different climate. We're nowhere near as susceptible as Brazil.
I'm moaning about the usual tabloid over reaction to these stories, with headlines like "IS IRELAND PREPARED" "SHOULD BORDERS BE CLOSED" "MIDGET GETS ATTACKED AFTER ZIKA VIRUS MISTAKE"

So you're moaning about something that hasn't happened yet while also making light of a very very serious problem. When problems like this occur i don't think we should choose to turn off because "it's on the other side of the world". Looking at the pictures of the children born with deformities would break anybodies heart. The fact that this could effect most of south America and some of North America should be of great concern.

c_man

Howard the Duck wrote: »

What do you want people to do? ignore the 1000s of children who will be born with a terrible disease?One city in Brazil went from 5 cases of microcephaly a year to 300 in the last 6 months .Some of the comments in here are unbelievable and clearly people aren't even bothering to read about it before commenting. This is something that needs urgent action.
There should be a clamber for something to be done about this, a vaccine is urgently needed.
Also last time i checked there is millions being spent on cancer research and other diseases.

I think you're missing the point entirely. My point is the media and public reaction to this here in Ireland will be way over the top. This will follow the exact same path as SARS outbreak in 2002 and Ebola more recently.

Of course something needs to be done in the places where it's happening. Please don't misrepresent what I was saying. there may be millions being spent on the others, but the point is that your average Joe will spend more time worrying about this (let's be honest in terms of Ireland) non-existent threat rather than getting off his own arse and doing some exercise/quitting smoking or actually facing of the myriad of life choices which actually will affect his life span.

Howard the Duck

Howard the Duck wrote: »

What do you want people to do? ignore the 1000s of children who will be born with a terrible disease?One city in Brazil went from 5 cases of microcephaly a year to 300 in the last 6 months .Some of the comments in here are unbelievable and clearly people aren't even bothering to read about it before commenting. This is something that needs urgent action.
There should be a clamber for something to be done about this, a vaccine is urgently needed.
Also last time i checked there is millions being spent on cancer research and other diseases.

People dismiss things like this because they're not directly affected but it comes across as though they think it doesn't matter. I'm sure most people feel some compassion for those directly affected. I hope so.

Zika is affecting people like you and me, and just because they're far away it doesn't mean they don't matter.

c_man

Candie wrote: »

People dismiss things like this because they're not directly affected

Actually I think the inverse is true. Easier to feel frightened by Ebola than face up to real everyday-in-Ireland killers.

Zika is affecting people like you and me, and just because they're far away it doesn't mean they don't matter.

Who said they don't matter?

Special Circumstances

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

It is only dangerous for pregnant women, and the mozzies aren't gonna turn up in Europe - have malaria infected mozzies ever done so ?

So it is scaremongering - but obviously very serious for the people in the area wanting to get pregnant.

Malaria mosquito was a problem in some parts of Europe until some time after ww2 when some eradication programs were run. (Or so the interwebz tells me)

The tiger mosquito that has taken hold in some parts of Europe can carry chikikunga and dengue afaik... my guess would be that it is able to carry the zika virus too if it is passable from an infected human (returned from travels) to a suitable mosquito and onto a non infected human. Yeah there's a few big ifs there, not saying it's definitely possible but i'd like to hear if it is.

Those tiger mosquito are nasty aggressive feckers.


Edit... panic! iodine tablets, where are my iodine tablets???!!!??

Howard the Duck

c_man wrote: »

I think you're missing the point entirely. My point is the media and public reaction to this here in Ireland will be way over the top. This will follow the exact same path as SARS outbreak in 2002 and Ebola more recently.

Of course something needs to be done in the places where it's happening. Please don't misrepresent what I was saying. there may be millions being spent on the others, but the point is that your average Joe will spend more time worrying about this (let's be honest in terms of Ireland) non-existent threat rather than getting off his own arse and doing some exercise/quitting smoking or actually facing of the myriad of life choices which actually will affect his life span.

I understand your point but i just don't see the relevance and i don't mean that is a sarcastic/bitchy way. Some people will always worry about things that won't affect them and if it isn't this it will be something else. Newspapers will always latch onto something and blow it out of proportion to sell papers. But at the same time the more attention this gets the better as it puts more pressure on the WOW to act faster than it did with Ebola. Also i think the average Joe is smarter than you're giving them credit for.

I just hate the attitude that seems to be more and more common these days of ignoring something because it isn't happening in our country or in Europe

c_man

c_man wrote: »

Actually I think the inverse is true. Easier to feel frightened by Ebola than face up to real everyday-in-Ireland killers.



Who said they don't matter?

There's always an element of worrying about the dramatic, unlikely threat, that people are powerless under instead of addressing the mundane steps within their power to take.

No one said it doesn't matter as such, but declaring it's nothing to worry about when it is an enormous worry and threat to millions of our fellow humans certainly sounds pretty dismissive of those peoples suffering.

The Backwards Man

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Malaria mosquito was a problem in some parts of Europe until some time after ww2 when some eradication programs were run. (Or so the interwebz tells me)

The tiger mosquito that has taken hold in some parts of Europe can carry chikikunga and dengue afaik... my guess would be that it is able to carry the zika virus too if it is passable from an infected human (returned from travels) to a suitable mosquito and onto a non infected human. Yeah there's a few big ifs there, not saying it's definitely possible but i'd like to hear if it is.

Those tiger mosquito are nasty aggressive feckers.


Edit... panic! iodine tablets, where are my iodine tablets???!!!??

AFAIK the mosquito that carries the zika virus can be found in places like Italy and Spain, it's the not the same mosquito as the malaria carrying one. So not that far way altogether.

Shurimgreat

anothernight wrote: »

It's primarily transmitted by mosquitoes, of which there aren't many in this part of the world. The symptoms are manageable in adults and it's not usually lethal. Meh, we'll be fine.

So we just cut ourselves off from the rest of the world, not travel there and we will be "fine"? The virus is spreading, don't ask me how, but it seems to be spreading to more common species of mosquito. That means a pregnant Irish woman travels to places like Africa, Asia or North America and could conceivably pick up the virus, if it spreads to local species of mosquito.

anothernight

Shurimgreat wrote: »

So we just cut ourselves off from the rest of the world, not travel there and we will be "fine"? The virus is spreading, don't ask me how, but it seems to be spreading to more common species of mosquito. That means a pregnant Irish woman travels to places like Africa, Asia or North America and could conceivably pick up the virus, if it spreads to local species of mosquito.

That's not what I said, but thanks for the misrepresentation.

(Disclosure: I have family in Brazil. Most of my family have had dengue, of which all survived. For adults, Zika is milder than dengue.)

The opening post asked: "Will this turn into another Ebola disaster but without the death toll?" I simply answered that question. The answer is: no, it won't. It's as simple as that.

Yes, it's devastating to pregnant women in the areas affected, but anyone seriously comparing it to ebola needs to get their head checked.

Howard the Duck

anothernight wrote: »

Yes, it's devastating to pregnant women in the areas affected, but anyone seriously comparing it to ebola needs to get their head checked.

Although not as deadly as Ebola this could have a much worse affect . 11000 deaths from Ebola. There could be up to 4 million cases of Zika, how many children will be born severely disabled from that 4 million? A lot i would expect

anothernight

Howard the Duck wrote: »

Although not as deadly as Ebola this could have a much worse affect . 11000 deaths from Ebola. There could be up to 4 million cases of Zika, how many children will be born severely disabled from that 4 million? A lot i would expect

And yet Zika is a lot easier to prevent than ebola. If you ask my family how they got dengue, they all have the same story: they didn't bother with precautions. Stagnant water, lack of mosquito nets.

Did ebola only affect foetuses? Nope. It affected everyone, and it killed most of them. Zika is very mild in adults, so prevention should focus on pregnant women and probably also children and the elderly, but that makes it easier to deal with than what ebola was at the height of the epidemic.

Again, a tragedy for pregnant women and their children, but not a new "ebola disaster", which is the question posed in the opening post.

Howard the Duck

anothernight wrote: »

And yet Zika is a lot easier to prevent than ebola. If you ask my family how they got dengue, they all have the same story: they didn't bother with precautions. Stagnant water, lack of mosquito nets.

Did ebola only affect foetuses? Nope. It affected everyone, and it killed most of them. Zika is very mild in adults, so prevention should focus on pregnant women and probably also children and the elderly, but that makes it easier to deal with than what ebola was at the height of the epidemic.

Again, a tragedy for pregnant women and their children, but not a new "ebola disaster", which is the question posed in the opening post.

You think it's easier to control the movement of mosquitoes then it is to control the movement of people?
Let's take dengue fever as an example which is also spread by the same mosquitoes last year 500,000 people were hospitalized because of this.
Now everyone already knows that it is spread by mosquitoes so that should make it easy to control the spread of according to your logic. But clearly it spreads and that will more than likely be the case with Zika. What really is needed here is a vaccine and a cheap testing kit.
In my opinion it is much easier to control a disease spread by humans than it is to control one spread by mosquitoes. I hope what you believe is correct and what I believe is wrong that would make me very happy.

freedominacup

eeguy wrote: »

Hundreds of column inches, hype, speculation and panic dedicated to a virus that will kill far less than the flu.

Most of them pre-written with the appropriate blanks for country of origin, expected/massively overstated mortality rates, a "should", "could" or "may" in every second sentence just to give writter/media outlet enough wiggle room to deny they ever said such a thing.

SEPT 23 1989

arayess wrote: »

makes you thankful living ireland and our ****ty climate.
we tend to be immune to these wonder-illnesses that crop up

read a few reports from brazil , seems like a terrible tragedy.
made me really sad reading about it and the pictures.

Its the knock on effect of these things is the problem, the middle east conflicts were always far away now the fallout is on our doorstep

anothernight

Howard the Duck wrote: »

You think it's easier to control the movement of mosquitoes then it is to control the movement of people?
Let's take dengue fever as an example which is also spread by the same mosquitoes last year 500,000 people were hospitalized because of this.
Now everyone already knows that it is spread by mosquitoes so that should make it easy to control the spread of according to your logic. But clearly it spreads and that will more than likely be the case with Zika. What really is needed here is a vaccine and a cheap testing kit.
In my opinion it is much easier to control a disease spread by humans than it is to control one spread by mosquitoes. I hope what you believe is correct and what I believe is wrong that would make me very happy.

Well, I'm only basing my opinion on the experiences of my family, extended family, and friends in Brazil. They're well aware that they got sick because they didn't take precautions against dengue (They're nonchalant about it because it's that common, and in their area people got quick medical attention for it. They talk about it as you and I would talk about getting a cold). Those who did, didn't get sick. Simple as that.

Of course it's bad that it will spread, but people can individually protect themselves against it. It will spread. Measures against its spread must be taken, but it's still likely that it will spread. You can still protect yourself, and it's not that difficult to take preventative measures on an individual (or even family) basis. For an Irish person that would involve refraining from travelling to affected areas. For people living in an affected area, getting rid of stagnant water, using mosquito nets, wearing long sleeves, using insect repellent and taking extra B vitamins will keep mosquitos away from their skin.

But again, for the third time, I was only arguing that it's not comparable to ebola. Again, the original post asked if it was a new ebola disaster, and my answer is no.

anothernight

anothernight wrote: »

Of course it's bad that it will spread, but people can individually protect themselves against it. It will spread. Measures against its spread must be taken, but it's still likely that it will spread. You can still protect yourself, and it's not that difficult to take preventative measures on an individual (or even family) basis. For an Irish person that would involve refraining from travelling to affected areas. For people living in an affected area, getting rid of stagnant water, using mosquito nets, wearing long sleeves, using insect repellent and taking extra B vitamins will keep mosquitos away from their skin.

This is all true. But it's not that simple because parasite borne illnesses are almost always a coproduction with poverty. What needs to happen is that the poorest populations most vulnerable to the initial infection - the ones with no running water, no sewage, no repellent, no resourses for vitamins etc - are targeted asap. Mozzie nets aren't much good for Zika since these mozzies bite like mad during the day.

The more infected persons there are, the more infected mozzies there are and the place to act initially is the overcrowded slums with no sanitary provision or running water, and populations near stagnant and slow moving bodies of water.

A lot of what we see as sensible precaution are the preserve of the relatively wealthy.

Howard the Duck

anothernight wrote: »

But again, for the third time, I was only arguing that it's not comparable to ebola. Again, the original post asked if it was a new ebola disaster, and my answer is no.

I take your point and i don't see much point in comparing the two myself it really doesn't make a difference at the end of the day. But in my opinion many more people will be affected by this and i think it's the fact that the worst affected will be new born children that i feel so strongly about it. Also i wasn't having a go at you directly, it was more the general comments in here that were writing this off in a jokey way as nothing major but i do suppose that is what AH is normally like

Howard the Duck

Candie wrote: »

This is all true. But it's not that simple because parasite borne illnesses are almost always a coproduction with poverty. What needs to happen is that the poorest populations most vulnerable to the initial infection - the ones with no running water, no sewage, no repellent, no resourses for vitamins etc - are targeted asap. Mozzie nets aren't much good for Zika since these mozzies bite like mad during the day.

The more infected persons there are, the more infected mozzies there are and the place to act initially is the overcrowded slums with no sanitary provision or running water, and populations near stagnant and slow moving bodies of water.

A lot of what we see as sensible precaution are the preserve of the relatively wealthy.

Indeed most Favelas( Brazilian slums) don't have proper water supplies and sanitation. I'm sure the same can be said for lots of areas around south America

anothernight

Candie wrote: »

This is all true. But it's not that simple because parasite borne illnesses are almost always a coproduction with poverty. What needs to happen is that the poorest populations most vulnerable to the initial infection - the ones with no running water, no sewage, no repellent, no resourses for vitamins etc - are targeted asap. Mozzie nets aren't much good for Zika since these mozzies bite like mad during the day.

The more infected persons there are, the more infected mozzies there are and the place to act initially is the overcrowded slums with no sanitary provision or running water, and populations near stagnant and slow moving bodies of water.

A lot of what we see as sensible precaution are the preserve of the relatively wealthy.

I only have experience with two parts of Brazil: one with a wetter climate but with a relatively financially stable population (poor by our standards, but not by theirs) and another very, very poor, which disproportionally depends on state handouts, but has a much drier climate. In both of those areas people do have the resources to fight mosquito-borne illnesses, because a lot of these resources are freely available from healthcare centres. In Brazil at least it's not that difficult to fight some of the infections they get. It's like the case with HIV: they get free condoms and free HIV medication, and yet the disease continues to spread. As with many things, education is sorely needed.

In other places where people really have nothing to prevent disease with (whether Zika or any others), I definitely agree with you.

anothernight

Howard the Duck wrote: »

I take your point and i don't see much point in comparing the two myself it really doesn't make a difference at the end of the day. But in my opinion many more people will be affected by this and i think it's the fact that the worst affected will be new born children that i feel so strongly about it. Also i wasn't having a go at you directly, it was more the general comments in here that were writing this off in a jokey way as nothing major but i do suppose that is what AH is normally like

I agree that there is no point, but it was the question at hand!

M Anonymous

Completely agree Candie.

Read somewhere that in Africa most people were immune after being infected.