While the article said that there wasn’t much risk of Ebola slime infection unless their was blood involved, however, see the following admission from that article —
Nevertheless, we cannot exclude the possibility of a true absence of viable virus in
the original samples. We hope to be able to repeat this study in the future with
better maintenance of the cold chain to resolve this question.”
The 2007 test team’s samples _ran out of liquid nitrogen cooling_ for their Ebola samples between Africa and its virus culture testing by the CDC in Atlanta.
Which, given the infection rates we are seeing in Liberia and elsewhere, means the samples went bad in transit due to the coolent break in the transportation chain.
The bottom line is we still don’t know the human infection rate from non-blood based human body fluids in the environment.
http://www.voanews.com/content/ebola-outbreak-liberia-united-nations/2454137.html?
The WHO said more than 700 more Ebola cases emerged in West Africa in one week, a statistic that shows the outbreak is accelerating. Just three weeks ago the number of new cases was around 500 for a one-week period.
The number of people believed to have killed is now more than 2,600, an increase of roughly 200 from the last estimate, WHO said Thursday. Most deaths have been in Liberia.
Just under half of the 5,300 cases of infection were recorded in the last three weeks, according to the WHO.
Officials said 318 health care workers have been sickened, and about half have died.
>snip<
The Liberia numbers have not been updated since 8 Sept 2014 and thus are not included in the above tabulation announced today Thursday 18 Sept 2014.
Precisely. Given the nature of this pathogen the only logical conclusion is to assume the worst until we know the exact details of this new strain. Plenty of people are making tremendous assumptions, many based on the strains involved in earlier outbreaks, but little is actually known about this specific strain.
The misinformation/obfuscation/lies coming out of the "authorities" is very troubling.
Pigs are not humans, and the pathology of infectious diseases is different in pigs versus in humans. Pigs get a respiratory illness from Ebola, but primates do not.
I believe that I have pointed out in other posts that there are severe limitations in published studies on the survivability of Ebola virus in the environment. The fact is that no one has done any systematic study of viability of virus in fomites, and any evidence of virus in non-blood derived fluids is inconclusive.
BTW, before going to all the trouble of quoting scientific papers (especially long passages from them), keep in mind that I have most likely already read those papers. Just in case I haven't seen the paper, feel free to post a link to the PubMed citation.