The Economics of Ebola

calicocat

I can't remember which paper now, but read at some point today that it has a huge chance of being in Britain by the end of this month.....!!

michaels

So I wonder how long it takes to produce meaningful quantities of vaccine assuming it works?

The whole thing seems very odd to me - it appears that there was obviously going to be a disaster for the last few months and yet no country has committed the resources to try and contain it, I can't think no one has done the modeling so has it been a 'doomed from the start' situation and that intervention on a large scale would have just led to a faster spread?

So today's pop quiz, if the only way to stop the spread now were to seal all borders of the affected region and leave the disease to run its course there is this what should be done? Sentencing millions to death to save billions?

vivatifosi

michaels wrote: »

So I wonder how long it takes to produce meaningful quantities of vaccine assuming it works?

The whole thing seems very odd to me - it appears that there was obviously going to be a disaster for the last few months and yet no country has committed the resources to try and contain it, I can't think no one has done the modeling so has it been a 'doomed from the start' situation and that intervention on a large scale would have just led to a faster spread?

So today's pop quiz, if the only way to stop the spread now were to seal all borders of the affected region and leave the disease to run its course there is this what should be done? Sentencing millions to death to save billions?

Sky is running a report from Alex Crawford in Liberia. The workers were removing bodies from a home, but it is very different to how we would imagine a home here... single room, cheek by jowl with other residents, nowhere else to go, other families inches away, no sanitation. It's pretty much impossible to escape and go into self quarantine.

If the same happened here, providing power and water are maintained, it would be easy for most people to hunker down indoors for a few weeks to ride out the incubation period, and do so with good food and sanitation. It wouldn't do the economy a lot of good, but it's better than the alternative.

michaels

WE are quite good at exponential growth on this board so lets try this for size:
Ebola deaths in August approx 1250
Ebola deaths in September approx 2500

Shall we extrapolate?


October easy 5,000
November 10,000
December 20,000


How about June 2015?

320,000

Or December 2015
20,048,000 (20 million deaths)



Or August 2016





0 (all 8 billion on the planet have already had it with 5billion plus dead)

In_For_A_Penny_2

michaels wrote: »

So I wonder how long it takes to produce meaningful quantities of vaccine assuming it works?

Once the vaccine is developed the mass production can be achieved in weeks.

The initial phase trials in the UK are due to complete in mid December. However for obvious reasons it needs to be tested in Africa where the logistics of administering it, will be more complex. Realistically we are looking at mid 2015.

Developing an effective vaccine is complex though. To prove efficacy, randomised, placebo controlled trials (RCT) need to be undertaken - this will be difficult to do in a controlled manner in affected regions and ethically might be difficult to justify considering the high mortality rates. We are in uncharted territory here. It is necessary though or we risk mass producing an ineffective vaccine when our resources could have been targeted improving the vaccine.

As for administering the vaccine, invariably, front line staff will be the first priority.

vivatifosi

michaels wrote: »

WE are quite good at exponential growth on this board so lets try this for size:
Ebola deaths in August approx 1250
Ebola deaths in September approx 2500

Shall we extrapolate?


October easy 5,000
November 10,000
December 20,000


How about June 2015?

320,000

Or December 2015
20,048,000 (20 million deaths)



Or August 2016





0 (all 8 billion on the planet have already had it with 5billion plus dead)

It won't happen though. I was just watching a report from Liberia. It said the government can't force people to stay in their houses for a quarantine period because the people are poor and often live a hand to mouth existence and buy food every day as they are too poor to have food in the house or do a weekly shop.

In the event things got that bad here, and I don't think they will, we will be forced to stay indoors for three weeks with just key workers out and about, eating our existing food supplies. Developed countries would pull up their drawbridge, all do the same, then after the safe period has passed, allow transit to other like minded countries. No it's Africa you would feel sorry for in that scenario.

Plus of course the population would never fall to zero as even in the do nothing scenario, about 30% survive, their blood can then be used for transfusions as this has been proven to help. Though of course, the degree to which AIDS is rampant in Africa is also an issue... I'm guessing as I don't know the answer, but if someone's immune system is compromised by HIV/AIDS then I would imagine that the survival chance with Ebola is significantly lower.

Fingers crossed for an effective vaccine and soon.

vivatifosi

Well, it beggars belief, but a second health worker has tested positive in America. The BBC are reporting, and I'm going to quote this from the article as it is quite extraordinary, that:

This is the second case of transmission in Texas, on top of the case in Spain.
Protective gear should minimise the risk to health workers treating Ebola patients.
But worryingly there have been reports of staff not getting the correct equipment or the necessary training.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29628622

Healthcare workers who tackle ebola are exceptionally brave. It isn't as though this outbreak got to America without other people being successfully treated there and protocols established. If true, they have been let down by a system.

We all talk about Health and Safety protocols with an element of derision. About unsafe Christmas trees and dangerous hanging baskets. But seriously, if employers don't take seriously the risk of ebola and really ensure that their workers know what they are doing and how to ensure that they minimise risk, then they should be ashamed of themselves.

In_For_A_Penny_2

Interesting that the initial focus of this thread was on the "economics of Ebola" which I initially thought was a tad tenuous. . .

There seems to be a growing call in the US for them to close airports/borders - at least to people travelling from affected countries. This might yet have major economic implications considering that most travel from West Africa comes through major European hubs.

Still, I hope there are enough informed individuals in the Obama administration to counter this madness.

Hysteria remains the biggest risk with Ebola for Western nations.

MRMX9

In_For_A_Penny wrote: »

Interesting that the initial focus of this thread was on the "economics of Ebola" which I initially thought was a tad tenuous. . .

There seems to be a growing call in the US for them to close airports/borders - at least to people travelling from affected countries. This might yet have major economic implications considering that most travel from West Africa comes through major European hubs.

Still, I hope there are enough informed individuals in the Obama administration to counter this madness.

Hysteria remains the biggest risk with Ebola for Western nations.

The second victim had just returned from Cleveland (Ohio - not Middlesbrough) so all 132 passengers on their flight have been asked to contact the CDC to get monitored.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29632433

This could start having serious effects on air travel - and the economy. Who wants to be stuck on a flight with others for up to 12 hours sharing the toilets with lots of people you don't know and being served food/drinks by the same stewards in this climate?

vivatifosi

In_For_A_Penny wrote: »

Interesting that the initial focus of this thread was on the "economics of Ebola" which I initially thought was a tad tenuous. . .

There seems to be a growing call in the US for them to close airports/borders - at least to people travelling from affected countries. This might yet have major economic implications considering that most travel from West Africa comes through major European hubs.

Still, I hope there are enough informed individuals in the Obama administration to counter this madness.

Hysteria remains the biggest risk with Ebola for Western nations.

Because this is an economics/house prices board, we try to keep the threads relevant or they get moved to the Arms. Sometimes that can make the discussion come across as a bit hard and uncaring, but it isn't.

I agree with your point re hysteria though, well in regard to the developed world anyway.