Aviation and the Ebola epidemic in West-Africa

[convair]

Suppose the SN "Ebola" flights are suspended. Suppose someone contaminated takes an Air Maroc flight from Monrovia to Casablanca and from there a connecting flight to BRU. No doubt Flanker and Co will feel much safer!

[RoMax]

except when the virus starts mutating to a much more aggressive type of Ebola and/or even starts spreading through air, but we are not even close to such a situation.

Sorry Romax, your studying aviation,not biology..

Not even close ? How can you tell ? It can have mutated to an airborne one.. an hour ago..
No-ane can tell, no-one can agree / disagree.. we only have statistics ...

You don't need to study something to get access to knowledge. While there is, like with every virus, the chance of it mutating to an airborne virus, that does not happen just at once, that needs quite some steps because a virus like Ebola needs some major changes to be able to survive when it's airborne and actually infect people through that way. And ok there were arrive at your point of statistics, but life works with statistics, that's reality. No known virus causing major diseases on humans has changed its mode of infection. That certainly doesn't mean it cannot happen in the future (and didn't happen in the past), but if that would already be a reason to stop flying, than better stop flying all together, because the chance of a terrostic attack or a crash due to human error or mechanical issue is probably far bigger. Safety in aviation (and any other sector) is still for a large part making people feeling safe, while actually there are not that safe as they might think.

[airazurxtror]

The meat can be a vector of Ebla if it's not cooked at high temperature.
Meat from the bush ("brousse") actually arrive in Belgium by air, and also meat coming from poaching ("braconnage").
In 2013, 24 controls were made by the AFSCA in Belgian airports.
Luggages arriving from 29 countries (amongst them Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia) were examined, resulting in the seizure of 1199 kg of food, 406 kg of it being meat.
("Le Soir", op.cit.)

[Passenger]

Two young Flemish health researchers leave for Guinee this Sunday. They're going to examine blood samples in the region where ebola was first discovered. "We're not afraid - we know that we have to stick to the protocols".

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/960/Buitenland ... bola.dhtml

(I don't mention the link to nieuws.vtm.be because that has limited access)

[tangolima]

Hello

SN postponed the Freetown - Monrovia route untill MAR2015

Greetings,

[Flanker2]

The first case of Ebola in the developped world has been discovered in the U.S. today.
It was only a matter of time, let's hope that he hasn't infected other people before being quarantined.

I wonder what his itinerary from Africa was.

Update:

The patient is believed to have had a handful of contacts with people after showing symptoms of the virus, and before being isolated, Frieden said. A CDC team was en route to Texas to help investigate those contacts.
Crew members who transported the patient to the hospital have been isolated, the chief of staff for Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings told CNN. None have shown symptoms of the disease so far.

cnn.com

Symptoms of the virus became apparent on 24 September, and on 28 September he was admitted to a Texas hospital and put in isolation.

BBC.co.uk

The virus is already running loose and CDC have to chase it now and try to isolate evrybody this man came in contact with...
There's no way of stopping this once it propagates into large cities like Dallas qnd from there on to everywhere else.

Bravo idiots, starting from the patient himself, the idiots of the WHO who don't enforce isolation but rather promote the free spreading of the disease, to the immigration staff who let this man in without a proper quarantine, and the airlines who continue to operate there. Bravo I say.

At this rate, we'll soon all be walking around in white suits.

[FlightMate]

Anybody knows his travel itinerary?

As apparently Ebola is only contagious after the first symptoms, I think other pax and crew are pretty safe, but you never know, right? Better find anybody who could have been in contact with him before it's too late and the disease spreads like crazy.

[Flanker2]

This person comes from Liberia and AF don't operate ROB anymore.
So this means that it was either SN or RAM as these are the only airlines left in ROB.
But if you want to connect to the U.S., RAM's codeshare network is not convenient.

So I think that there is more than 50% chance that this person flew to Dallas via BRU with SN and perhaps via Washington with SN or UA.


He had 4 days to contaminate the relatives he went to visit, all the people who washed his dishes and cuttlery, people whom he spoke with at close distance, and given the high current temperatures in Dallas, all people who came in contact with his sweat on the exposed parts of his body, from his hands to everywhere else.

Also, the medical crew who have already been isolated.

Good luck to the CDC... There's no way to contain that kind of exposure and I pray the best for those who have already been contaminated to survive this.

[sn26567]

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Thomas Frieden has been clear that no one on the flight to the United States would have been at risk because the patient wasn’t sick yet when he flew.

“He was checked for fever before getting on the flight,” said CDC Director Frieden. “There is no reason to believe anyone on the flight was at risk.” Frieden, along with Dallas County and Texas state health officials, emphasized that the patient did not become contagious until Sept. 24 when he began to display symptoms.

The patient left Liberia on 19 Sept. and flew to the US on 20 Sept. Officials would not release the name of the airline(s) or the flight number(s).

“There is zero risk of transmission” to other passengers on the overseas airplane flight, Frieden said.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/09/30 ... me-to.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola- ... nt-n215451

[sn26567]

On 19 September, there was indeed an SN flight that left Monrovia (ROB) with destination Brussels. Flight SN1247 was operated by OO-SFZ and left ROB at 20:20 to arrive in BRU the next day at 03:00.

From BRU to DFW, he could have taken US751 via PHL on a USAirways 757 (codeshared with AA), but AA denied that he took one of its flights.

SN1247 was probably one of the flights of the patient. But as explained in my previous post, there was zero risk for the other passengers on that flight.

[Passenger]

Bravo idiots, starting from the patient himself, the idiots of the WHO who don't enforce isolation but rather promote the free spreading of the disease, to the immigration staff who let this man in without a proper quarantine, and the airlines who continue to operate there. Bravo I say. At this rate, we'll soon all be walking around in white suits.

You're not only an aviation nitwit, but also a medical nitwit (*). Ebola is so widely spread that it's totally impossible to enforce isolation.

Unless your plan is to activate the Enola Gay (**) and send it to Africa this time?

(*) off course we know why you call the World Health Organization "idiots": they're grateful that airlines like Brussels Airlines continue to fly to ebola regions. And for some obscure reason, you have a mission on earth to sh.t on Brussels Airlines five times a day.

(**) the Enola Gay can make a fuel stop at Kinshasa N'Dolo, your favourite African airport.

[airazurxtror]

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Thomas Frieden has been clear that no one on the flight to the United States would have been at risk because the patient wasn’t sick yet when he flew.

“He was checked for fever before getting on the flight,” said CDC Director Frieden. “There is no reason to believe anyone on the flight was at risk.” Frieden, along with Dallas County and Texas state health officials, emphasized that the patient did not become contagious until Sept. 24 when he began to display symptoms.

The patient left Liberia on 19 Sept. and flew to the US on 20 Sept. Officials would not release the name of the airline(s) or the flight number(s).

“There is zero risk of transmission” to other passengers on the overseas airplane flight, Frieden said.

May I quote again part of the "Le Soir" article I have quote above (25 sept, 7.43 pm) :

-each passenger at Monrovia, Fretown or Conakry airport must declare on his honor that he is not sick with Ebola and has not been in contact with the virus ...
- the only medical test by local agents is the body temperature; in the first stage of Ebola a Dafalgan is enough to lower the temperature under 37,5°, which is good to board the airplane.
- some thermometers are known to have shown 20 °...
- the thermoscan must be used at a fixed distance and aim at a certain point of the temple, the measurement is not always accurately made; there is no systematic control at the exit of the VIP lounge ...

- it is acknowledge that there is no contagion if there are no symptoms. According to an expert, between 24 and 48 hours before the symptoms, there are already enough viruses to be contagious. For instance, microdrops of blood could be dispersed when blowing one's nose.
- a passengers that begins to develop a temperature during the flight will freely go away after landing, in Belgium or on a connecting flight, there is no temperature control at landing

[Inquirer]

Yes flanker/airazurxtor (are you one and the same, btw???), but you can not quarantine a whole country unless you put a fence of 10m high around it like they did in West Berlin, so you car run from this disease, but you can't hide and it will get to you anyway: just look at how thousands of illegal boat refugees come ashore in Lampedusa every day. One they there will be a case amongst then too.

What we need is more help overthere so a disease relatively easy to control isn't able to spead further, something it will otherwise, regardless there being any flights or not.

As I have already said before: the Spanish flu conquered the entire world exactly a century ago, and there were no intercontinental planes then, which is the best proof it's not aviation which is spending diseases, it's the human behaviour to want to go places, regardless the means available to it.

[FlightMate]

I'm with you, airazuxtor.

By experience, temperture checks at airports are a joke. (thermometer reading 32°, am I healthy or dead already?)

And certain sources affirm that, although the risk of contagion before displaying the first symptoms is low, it is not null.

I understand why they are reticent about giving the names of the airlines, or the complete itinerary, but maybe they should enquire a little bit, just to make sure all the passengers sitting next to him are aware, at least, if not under control.

[airazurxtror]

As I have already said before: the Spanish flu conquered the entire world exactly a century ago, and there were no intercontinental planes then, which is the best proof it's not aviation which is spending diseases, it's the human behaviour to want to go places, regardless the means available to it.

Aviation is spreading diseases, just more rapidly than before.
If the main carriers (Air France, British Airways for instance) have stopped flying to these countries, they have a good reason.
Of course, Brussels Airlines also has a good reason not to stop : they desperately need the money.
In my view, it's irresponsible.

[FlightMate]

If no infected passenger had taken an SN flight, we all would have said "good economic decision, Mr Gustin, you saved our airline!"

It seems the gamble was too risky, and hopefully the paranoia won't spread too fast when word circulates that SN let an infected pax travel.

Too early to say "I told you so", but I am not very confident....

[andorra-airport]

A website claims that the patient was in Liberia for a funeral. Flew back via BRU, IAD on to Dallas.

http://www.redstate.com/2014/09/30/the- ... to-my-show

[Flanker2]

Passenger, you're misunderstanding my tone.
I'm saying that I don't care if the government has to give SN subsidies to make them stop these flights, but the responsible thing to do is to make SN end these flights. I think that the EU will find it more acceptable if they use this excuse for their subsidies...

Inquirer, you are right and wrong at the same time, but as Airazurxtor points out, the difference is in the speed. Also, it depends on the propagating factor, ie birds, etc...
One century ago, there is no way that Ebola could have gone from a remote village in Liberia to DFW in less than a day. Also, a global response and coordination was not possible, this is possible today.

Also, our societies of today have much larger physical human contact than before. Public transportation and horeca activities were not as crowded as they are today. Next time, count how many times you make skin contact during a travel/trip. You wil be surprised.

As for WHO calling for continued flights... governments have C130's, C17's, C-5's and other aircraft at their disposal. Why does it have to be commercial aircraft at any cost? I find this very weird.
Nobody can believe that SN is continuing these flights in support of Ebola. Even when they show the cargo pallets being loaded on the A333 on TV, what do you think they can do with a few pallets of equipment 2 or 3 times a week? Not much.

[Inquirer]

the responsible thing to do is to make SN end these flights.

Excuse me, but just why would it be the more responsible thing to do, if indeed like you admit yourself, it can just as well propagate without any air links, just like I've said?

IMHO, it's not the mean of transportation which is the problem, it's the fact that people travel and will do so, even on foot if they need to.

The only solution is to help those countries get the situation under control and apparently that isn't so complicated at all, provided they'd get the right means, which they sadly don't have, so rather than all run away from it like half the planet is doing now, we better start doing something overthere, or otherwise this disease is going to invade also our country, whether it will be by plane today, or by boat next month, it really doesn't matter.

We can't just pretend to be living on another planet, can we, thinking that if we cut all airlinks we'll be safe, when at the same time for instance air maroc flies there and we have tens of thousands of tourists going to Morocco every week. Or do we have to cut all links with that country too?
And with all other countries in North Africa, or even the whole of Africa just to be safe?
In the end, we'll just end up putting ourselves in quarantine then and even then we're not safe.
Not a very rational idea indeed: it's more of a NIMBY attitute, IMHO.

[sn26567]

BREAKING: Dow Jones index falls 200 points on disappointing economic news, drop in airline stocks over Ebola fears.

Not very rational...