Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rustyconover 4251 days ago
If you asked 10 average people what they think "airborne" means in this context, I doubt they'd say there is a difference between wet and dry transmission. I'd say for the purposes of argument, if a guy coughs violently on you because he's sick there is risk you could get Ebola. If a guy vomits in the subway car, apparently there is a risk of Ebola transmission. I've been on the subway cars and in taxi cabs it happens more than you think. Do you think they bleach all of those things adequately? No way, the financial incentives don't align to properly do it.

The government is using semantics and spin to their advantage by saying it isn't airborne via dried viral transmission. The WHO agrees[1] that it also isn't airborne, but also admits surfaces can transmit the virus.

Most officials omit this detailed explanation since they have no adequate explanation of how to decontaminate the urban environment en masse if an outbreak does occur.

In the end we all have to assess our own risk profiles. Will I stand or sit next to somebody coughing? I doubt it. Or will I take mass transit if I can easily walk to where I need to be by leaving a bit earlier? Nope.

[1] - http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en...