What are the chances of Saudi Arabia getting Ebola Virus?

Why are you worried about a virus that doesn't exist in Saudi Arabia as of today???

Well, I'm not worried at all. I'm just concerned for so many reasons:

1. Africa is not so far away from here, and so I don't understand why people shouldn't be concerned, especially that throughout the year people come to visit the Holy Cities for pilgrimage.

2. If you've seen labor camps, a lot of expatriates are crammed in a room, and many of them do not know the disease, what it looks like or how to prevent its spread.

3. If you've seen how people prepare food at the restaurants, many of them prepare food with their bare hands.

4. The culture here requires people to shake hands and even kiss each other on the chicks and forehead.

5. You can't really tell a person has acquired the disease within the first two days, as signs and symptoms appear beyond that.

I was just curious whether the health care system here has some methods to track down any form of Ebola transmission. And is it not right (and better) to prepare for the future - an actual threat, rather than addressing an issue at the present? SO WHY NOT ASK NOW?

www.lindaikeji.blogspot.com/2014/08/sus … saudi.html

tansari wrote:

Why are you worried about a virus that doesn't exist in Saudi Arabia as of today???

Try reading the news in this link below:

http://news.yahoo.com/saudi-arabian-man … 15843.html

I have yet to verify if its true, but IF indeed it is true, then it might be too late for your to not be concerned... Or worry, considering that even the medical professionals were among those killed and/or infirm during the outbreak of MERS which is relatively less fatal.

Hello gonzrule,

Don't be fooled into buying into the international sensationalist media reports about the Ebola Virus outbreak. They publish overly exaggerated headlines calling this an "EPIDEMIC" simply to sell more newpapers, advertising space and to drum up more donations for international charitable organizations.

By definition you don't have an EPIDEMIC untll you have over 7.7% of a population infected. 1048 cases of Ebola, when you're considering the total population of 4 African countries, is like calling a cup of water a flood. Let's be real here!

However, such alarmist headlines should be great for boosting the revenues of charitable organizations; which is probably the whole idea of this media scare campaign in the first place.

Lets look at the figures:

Guinea - Population : 10 million / 427 cases /  Percentage:  0.0047%

Liberia -  Population 4.5 million / 391 cases /  Percentage:  0.0086%

Sierra Leone - Population  6.3 million /  574 cases /  Percentage:  0.0091%

Nigeria - Population 173.6 million / 3 cases /  Percentage:  0.0000017%


Does anybody really see an EPIDEMIC when you look at the true figures?????

Given that all of the infected nations are restricting air travel the likelihood that this outbreak will spread are relatively small, if not non-existent. Almost all of the other African nations are also monitoring international arrivals and are conducting medical exams on anyone coming from infected regions, if they won't submit to an examination they are refused entry.... simple as that.

You're really worrying about a non-issue.

Fatality rate is high, but Ebola is not very communicable.  You have to come in to contact with the bodily fluids of an infected person to catch it.

So, just stay away from other people's bodily fluids, practice good hygiene, and you will be fine.

The Ebola virus belongs to the group of viruses called filoviruses, as do the Marburg and Reston viruses. Scientists first identified the Marburg virus in 1967, when it caused a small outbreak among sick monkeys brought from Africa to a medical laboratory in Marburg, Germany. In 1976, a filovirus named for the Ebola River in Zaire (now the Congo) caused an epidemic in central Africa that killed hundreds of people. Smaller outbreaks have occurred in Africa since then. In 1989 and 1990, many monkeys shipped from Asia to a research laboratory in Reston, Virginia, died from a disease that was found to have been caused by a filovirus.

How Do People Catch Ebola Fever?

The Ebola virus is spread from person to person through contact with infected blood and body fluids. Doctors also believe that it passes through the air when an infected person coughs or sneezes. Hospital workers are at high risk for Ebola during outbreaks, because they come into contact with blood and body fluids when they care for infected patients. Infected patients often die very quickly, limiting the opportunity for the virus to be transmitted to many other people. This may be why Ebola outbreaks have not become widespread.

What Are the Symptoms?

About 5 to 10 days after infection, people with Ebola get a fever, headache, and body aches. Frequently there is nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, cough, chest pain, and sore throat. Often there is sensitivity to light, swollen lymph glands, rash, as well as other symptoms. Patients also begin excessive bleeding where injections are given. During the second week of infection, people with Ebola may get better, but often they develop severe bleeding from many parts of the body. If this occurs, then the patient will probably not survive.

How Is Ebola Treated?

Treatment of Ebola includes supportive measures, such as blood transfusions, but there is not yet a vaccine or medicine to prevent or cure Ebola virus infection. Isolating people with Ebola fever from other people and wearing masks, gloves, and gowns when taking care of infected patients in the hospital can reduce the chance of an outbreak.

While the number of cases in the 2014 Ebola outbreak are higher than they have been in previous years, really unless you're a healthcare worker who comes into direct contact with infected patients your chances of contracting Ebola are extremely small.

wjwoodward wrote:

Hello gonzrule,

Don't be fooled into buying into the international sensationalist media reports about the Ebola Virus outbreak. They publish overly exaggerated headlines calling this an "EPIDEMIC" simply to sell more newpapers, advertising space and to drum up more donations for international charitable organizations.

By definition you don't have an EPIDEMIC untll you have over 7.7% of a population infected. 1048 cases of Ebola, when you're considering the total population of 4 African countries, is like calling a cup of water a flood. Let's be real here!

However, such alarmist headlines should be great for boosting the revenues of charitable organizations; which is probably the whole idea of this media scare campaign in the first place.

Lets look at the figures:

Guinea - Population : 10 million / 427 cases /  Percentage:  0.0047%

Liberia -  Population 4.5 million / 391 cases /  Percentage:  0.0086%

Sierra Leone - Population  6.3 million /  574 cases /  Percentage:  0.0091%

Nigeria - Population 173.6 million / 3 cases /  Percentage:  0.0000017%


Does anybody really see an EPIDEMIC when you look at the true figures?????

Given that all of the infected nations are restricting air travel the likelihood that this outbreak will spread are relatively small, if not non-existent. Almost all of the other African nations are also monitoring international arrivals and are conducting medical exams on anyone coming from infected regions, if they won't submit to an examination they are refused entry.... simple as that.

You're really worrying about a non-issue.

Well, I'm not saying there is an epidemic. A fatality rate of 90% is very alarming and is far more deadly than any other communicable diseases out there and in the past.

I don't buy the "conspiracy theory" of exaggerated news to make things look worse than they actually are, because what seems to me in this case is the opposite, that the real and actual development is kept hidden to avoid panic in the current peaceful situation.

Yes, it has to be at least 7% of the population to consider occurrence of an epidemic. But don't they always begin with ONE single person? It's just unfortunate in this case that the one we are dealing with right now is far more fatal than the rest that human civilization had encountered before, and this is probably only the beginning,

And if it is none-issue and if there is no ACTUAL THREAT, then why did the government suspend pilgrimage visas from West African Countries?

I think you are being complacent on this matter. Only time will tell.

Trapezius wrote:

Fatality rate is high, but Ebola is not very communicable.  You have to come in to contact with the bodily fluids of an infected person to catch it.

So, just stay away from other people's bodily fluids, practice good hygiene, and you will be fine.

Ebola is definitely not your ordinary virus.

When you see technicians wearing level 4 haz-mat suits when handling it, are we supposed to believe that good hygiene is enough to keep us safe? And there's also one article I just cant remember where I came across with it, there was a study on animals breathing the same circulated air as those with the disease, and the healthy ones acquired it too.

Well, we have yet to understand its pathology and mode of transmission, so how are we to know exactly how safe we are?

If you're so worried wear a body suit

rareshine wrote:

If you're so worried wear a body suit

If you can't, in the first place, contribute in the forum, why bother then?

Are you this worried about Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Malaria, Dengue and Yellow Fever? Your chances of contracting them and dying are a great deal higher?

Perhaps if you're so concerned you'd best stay home, don't venture out of the house and don't go anywhere near hospitals, because THEY are full of sick people.

The journalist that died was in close contact with people affected by EBOLA as he was reporting about it in one of the countries with EBOLA patients. You're probably at a higher risk of getting DENGUE fever than EBOLA in Dammam.

I agree 100% with wjwoodward and trapezius.

Continue worrying and you'll make your life hell. It is good to be pre-cautious. When you hear about existence of this or any other virus within your vicinity, do practice caution and be careful. Right now, it's too early for this.

wjwoodward wrote:

Are you this worried about Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Malaria, Dengue and Yellow Fever? Your chances of contracting them and dying are a great deal higher?

Perhaps if you're so concerned you'd best stay home, don't venture out of the house and don't go anywhere near hospitals, because THEY are full of sick people.

OK.

Swine Flu - I had never worried about it. Cook the food well and you're good to go. Right?

Malaria - Just don't go to places where Malaria is prevalent. Or if that can't be avoided, just don't get bitten by mosquitoes, then you're fine! Right?

Dengue - I've lived in a community where Dengue is prevalent during the rainy season. My relatives got Dengue too, but I never worried. Mosquitoes causing Dengue have been known to be blood suckers during the day time and they mostly affect children - it's a fact. Even though I had lived my entire youth in a Dengue-infested community, it never affected how I grew up.

Yellow Fever - I don't really give it attention.

Please, I am not overly reacting to what I'm reading on the news. I have been following these "outbreaks" for quite some time now, and I am telling you it's just getting worse. Numbers don't lie.

People getting the disease don't know they've acquired the virus until initial signs and symptoms appear, and who know what they've been doing or who they've been hanging out with in that course of time?!!

tansari wrote:

The journalist that died was in close contact with people affected by EBOLA as he was reporting about it in one of the countries with EBOLA patients. You're probably at a higher risk of getting DENGUE fever than EBOLA in Dammam.

I agree 100% with wjwoodward and trapezius.

Continue worrying and you'll make your life hell. It is good to be pre-cautious. When you hear about existence of this or any other virus within your vicinity, do practice caution and be careful. Right now, it's too early for this.

So let's all hear from each other again after some time, but do update each other for any significant development. After all, we are a community.

my contribution was sufficient in a sentence.

gonzrule wrote:

Please, I am not overly reacting to what I'm reading on the news. I have been following these "outbreaks" for quite some time now, and I am telling you it's just getting worse. Numbers don't lie.

Yes you are overreacting, in fact you're clearly paranoid about this. The news reports ARE GROSSLY EXAGGERATED, the risk of contracting Ebola Virus even in infected nations is minimal if you are not in direct contact with infected individuals.

And you're absolutely right, THE NUMBERS DON'T LIE. I've given you the figures, accurate figures from the World Health Organization. Did you know that the number of people that have the hiccups at any given moment in all of these countries exceed these numbers???? Would you worry about dying from the hiccups too?

Do yourself a very big favor, if you're really this worried (and not just putting on that you are for dramatic effect) then DO NOT GO TO SAUDI ARABIA or anywhere else in Africa, nor in the USA because now they have a couple of cases there too, don't they! If you're already in Saudi Arabia consider leaving for somewhere you'll feel safe, because in very short order you're going to be an emotional wreck, you're almost one now.

gonzrule wrote:

A fatality rate of 90% is very alarming...

DEATH has a fatality rate of 100%, there has never been a recorded case of anybody that has survived it. Not in the medical records at least!

"DEATH has a fatality rate of 100%, there has never been a recorded case of anybody that has survived it. Not in the medical records at least!"

I appreciate the humor. 

wjwoodward wrote:

gonzrule wrote:

Please, I am not overly reacting to what I'm reading on the news. I have been following these "outbreaks" for quite some time now, and I am telling you it's just getting worse. Numbers don't lie.

Yes you are overreacting, in fact you're clearly paranoid about this. The news reports ARE GROSSLY EXAGGERATED, the risk of contracting Ebola Virus even in infected nations is minimal if you are not in direct contact with infected individuals.

And you're absolutely right, THE NUMBERS DON'T LIE. I've given you the figures, accurate figures from the World Health Organization. Did you know that the number of people that have the hiccups at any given moment in all of these countries exceed these numbers???? Would you worry about dying from the hiccups too?

Do yourself a very big favor, if you're really this worried (and not just putting on that you are for dramatic effect) then DO NOT GO TO SAUDI ARABIA or anywhere else in Africa, nor in the USA because now they have a couple of cases there too, don't they! If you're already in Saudi Arabia consider leaving for somewhere you'll feel safe, because in very short order you're going to be an emotional wreck, you're almost one now.

Sorry, but it seems to me that you're swerving off topic. The subject of this forum is the transmission of Ebola virus and the readiness of Saudi Arabia to respond to the disease should it enter the Kingdom or should there be any outbreak ESPECIALLY THIS COMING MONTH OF OCTOBER WHEN PEOPLE FLOCK TO THE HOLY CITIES FOR PILGRIMAGE.

And I'm sorry but I find it lousy to equate Ebola to death. Death has always been inescapable to every person (or living being) on Earth, as far as medical record goes, but your argument of equating Ebola to death is just lousy... And why would you bring the issue on the number of hiccups in the Middle East here?!! Ebola and hiccups are completely on different categories. You can't transmit hiccup. It won't have anything to do with pilgrimage, and neither will the number of hiccups rise when people start flocking to Mecca or Medina for pilgrimage.

On the other hand and for the record, I am not overly reacting. I'm just curious, and I'm just sharing what I believe I know so far, regardless of how people will respond.

About two months ago I mentioned about the spread of Ebola Virus in West Africa, and no one seemed to mind. I was right to be concerned about it that now the number of cases has gone up DRAMATICALLY.

You're a doctor, and I know that you know the the world has yet to fully understand this disease. Currently what we BELIEVE to know is that the disease can be transmitted when signs and symptoms show up. But is not true that there are communicable diseases out there that can also be transmitted even during the incubation period? And who knows who carries the disease?!!

Lastly, so far, it is a fact that there is no cure and there is no vaccine. With all that is said, is it wrong to consider Ebola a threat? And is it wrong to raise awareness?

rareshine wrote:

my contribution was sufficient in a sentence.

There is no denial you made a significant amount of contribution by way of grouping letters together to form a statement that carries a complete thought. Your contribution makes the world (or the Middle East) a safer place to be, and for that you get a 

It is not wrong to be concerned, but to be quite honest you've proven with your postings here that you've gone way beyond that point, you're absolutely phobic! Your only postings to Expat-blog are about Ebola and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, nothing else!

Either you're phobic, a confirmed hypocondriac or you're just here to engage in Saudi bashing. It's really hard to say which. Perhaps a bit of all three. If you have absolutely nothing other than diseases to discuss I'd suggest that you take a break from posting for a while.

Ebola Virus is spread via DIRECT CONTACT with infected individuals. Anyone who does not have direct contact is not at risk, health authorities are taking the outbreak seriously enough and are taking all necessary steps to keep it from spreading.

You have made your point, you've also made it quite clear that you are not interested in listening to opposing opinions, don't care about facts and figures and that nothing is changing your mind. I think we all understand that. So what is your point in beating this subject to death? To me it just appears that you're here for no other purpose than to stir the pot or to impose your own opinion on others who quite frankly just don't share it.

Your obvious paranoia about this disease only serves to create panic in others, this is not only unnecessary but wholly irresponsible.

Oh, and to answer your original question, "What are the chances of Saudi Arabia getting Ebola Virus?" They're the same as any other nation's chances... virtually no chance at all.

wjwoodward wrote:

It is not wrong to be concerned, but to be quite honest you've proven with your postings here that you've gone way beyond that point, you're absolutely phobic! Your only postings to Expat-blog are about Ebola and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, nothing else!

Either you're phobic, a confirmed hypocondriac or you're just here to engage in Saudi bashing. It's really hard to say which. Perhaps a bit of all three. If you have absolutely nothing other than diseases to discuss I'd suggest that you take a break from posting for a while.

Ebola Virus is spread via DIRECT CONTACT with infected individuals. Anyone who does not have direct contact is not at risk, health authorities are taking the outbreak seriously enough and are taking all necessary steps to keep it from spreading.

You have made your point, you've also made it quite clear that you are not interested in listening to opposing opinions, don't care about facts and figures and that nothing is changing your mind. I think we all understand that. So what is your point in beating this subject to death? To me it just appears that you're here for no other purpose than to stir the pot or to impose your own opinion on others who quite frankly just don't share it.

Your obvious paranoia about this disease only serves to create panic in others, this is not only unnecessary but wholly irresponsible.

Oh, and to answer your original question, "What are the chances of Saudi Arabia getting Ebola Virus?" They're the same as any other nation's chances... virtually no chance at all.

You're being ridiculous, since when did you have a background in Psychology?

You see, what I have been trying to point out here is that the disease is a THREAT. The chance of getting the virus here in KSA exists in the future, and I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW TO RESPOND WHEN AND IF IT REACHES KSA. It's that plain and simple. That's the reason I want to raise awareness. Is there not such a thing as PREVENTION in Brazil?

But anyway, since you evidently consider yourself an authority about this issue (I suppose you know too well the culture here in KSA), and so I'll take you word, that Saudi Arabia and any other nations have no chance at all of getting Ebola virus. Or are you saying it so because these mere exaggeration in the media are nothing but false flags or some sort..? I hope you are right.

Anyway, let's just stop from here. This is evidently not being fruitful. You're downplaying an issue which I think is getting worse.

Maybe pack-up and go to the Philippines? That way you will spare us your posts, as clearly nothing will convince you that the likelihood of being infected is tiny to nil. So there is only 1 solution, that will make you and us happy.

I have family all over East Africa & Saudi Arabia, and never once has the thought of "ohhh, they are close to the ebola, they are going to get infected" came to mind. They are Muslims, so maybe I should pick up the phone and tell them to keep away from the Holy Cities and from pilgrims.

Guys, let's just stop here. This discussion is not going anywhere...