Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The percentage of dogs tested near a previous outbreak of Ebola was 31.8% positive. That means for at least a short period time these dogs carried an active virus until they developed antibodies.
To protect our dog population in the USA it is possible for dogs to be tested for Ebola before they arrive on shore.
It is little different then testing them for rabies.
The study did not find any live virus in the dogs, just evidence the animals' immune systems had contact with the virus at some point. Also, two French dogs falsely tested positive, so some of the African dogs may also have had false positive tests.
Despite this, there is no actual confirmation that dogs can transfer the virus to humans. The dogs themselves do not get sick.
The actual bottom line is that testing dogs may be a way to find out if a community has ebola circulating even if there are no cases in humans or non-human primates.
By the way, there is no test for rabies apart from quarantine and waiting for symptoms or sacrificing the animal and examining the brain.
I would be more worried about the people voluntarily going to Africa, getting infected, that are being allowed to fly back into the US.
People who are being evacuated while they are ill are handled with strict infection control procedures. Ebola was already here in research labs before the current outbreak.
I would not worry too much about those coming in through customs; I would be more worried about those who evade customs when they enter the country. And top on the list of communicable deceases is TB.
A week later, it killed the boy’s mother, then his 3-year-old sister, then his grandmother.
......
Not too many children prepare raw bushmeat. This child got it somewhere.
Dogs with anti-bodies means that at one point the virus was active.
Isn't far more logical the boy obtained the virus when licked by a dog?
Dogs in Africa are a tested and confirmed reservoir for the virus.
BTW eating dogs is common in Liberia. So yes the child may have been fed under cooked dog meat.
You are speculating.
They have isolated no infectious virus from dogs, and ebola does not cause illness in dogs. That suggests that a dog's immune system probably eliminates the virus quickly after exposure.
Bush meat and fruit bats have been identified as sources of the virus.
"The new analysis, published in the August 29 issue of Science, reveals that the current Ebola outbreak stemmed from an earlier initial leap from the wild into humans, rather than the virus repeatedly jumping from a natural reservoir—perhaps infected animals—to humans."
Where that child came into contact with the virus is impossible to prove, but it was not likely to be a dog.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
