“Ebola is a genetically modified organism (GMO),” declared Dr. Cyril Broderick, Professor of Plant Pathology, in a front-page story published in the Liberian Observer.
We have come to know the World Health Organization as a pet of the multinational pharmaceutical complex, and in the case of Ebola, it has not disappointed anyone. The WHO did its job as fear-monger in chief during the manufactured H1N1 ‘crisis’ and is doing its part to make Ebola another doomsday episode.
According to the WHO, Ebola is in full geographic expansion in the three most affected countries: Liberia, Guinea Conakry and Sierra Leone, and the threat looms over border nations due to the lack of local and international staff to deal with the outbreak. While the WHO scares the populations in places where Ebola has allegedly appeared, it has launched the usual psychological game where it assures the world that it is still possible to halt the ‘epidemic’.
That is the hope expressed today by the Deputy Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO), Bruce Aylward, coordinator of the operational response in the fight against Ebola.
In a press conference, the head of the WHO highlighted two aspects, the situation is serious and will be even worse, so that not only we must not lower our guard but intensify and multiply exponentially every effort He said that if everything is implemented correctly and promptly, the world will be able to control the epidemic.
Today the number of infected persons is, according to the WHO, 8,914, “so this week will overcome the 9,000 cases“. The organization says it can account for 4,447 deaths; and that the mortality rate continues at an average of 70 percent.
Let’s remember that it was the WHO that said that H1N1 was a threat to global health and that only a massive vaccinations campaign could prevent a global pandemic. Not only was the WHO wrong about the global threat warning, but also about the need for mass vaccinations.
When everything was said and done, a large number of supposed cases of H1N1 ended up being something else, and many of the deaths registered by the WHO as a result of H1N1 were later dismissed.
At present, the WHO says there are a thousand new cases of Ebola per week, but the expectation is that in early December this figure will increase to a range of between 5,000 and 10,000 cases every seven days. Expectation, either for the best and for the worst is never a good parameter to attempt to predict how a disease may spread, is it?
Additionally, it is safe to say that it is contradictory that the WHO is warning about a massive increase in Ebola cases while it does nothing to prevent such a spread.
The countries that have seen the most cases of Ebola still have ‘porous’ borders and those that have seen one or two cases can’t even keep up with the minimum conditions. Most of them remain incapable of dealing with the conditions needed to treat one single patient.
Mr. Aylward has also said that if the WHO’s predicitions come true, Ebola cases will peak soon, and that moment will mark the start of a gradual reduction in cases, which should eventually lead to a controlled epidemic.
See the contradiction?
Either Ebola does not pose such a serious threat to the people of the world or the health authorities are extremely complacent.
The WHO believes that the growth curve will begin to decrease from early December and will start to see a clear decline before the year ends.
For this to happen, Ebola must have previously achieved the goal “70-70-60″, established by the United Nations Mission for Ebola Emergency Response.
The objective “70-70-60″ is to get seventy percent of those infected into isolation and that seventy percent of burials are made in a dignified but sure way. This means that health authorities will be able to tackle two of the main vectors of infection.
The idea is that in two months authorities will be able to detect all transmission chains. “This will obviously depend on how fast we implement all our goals, and how effective they are,” he said.
Aylward added that for now, the task is more difficult, since there is a constant geographic spread of the virus.
“We found that Ebola is present in more counties than a week ago. And this happens in the three countries” most affected, said Aylward, adding that the same situation exists in the three capitals, where more and more cases are reported.
The assistant general manager was concerned about the possibility that the virus “crosses borders” and cases begin arising in neighboring countries like Guinea Bissau, Mali, Senegal and especially, Ivory Coast.
The question is why hasn’t the WHO or the health authorities in the countries themselves sealed their borders to avoid the unnecessary spread of the virus from one country to another? The movement of people is undoubtedly the best form of contagion, yet nothing is being done to stop it.
“We have a clear problem of recruitment of international staff, and this is a big challenge,” confessed Aylward. On this matter, the question is, why have some countries like the United States have waster resources and time sending their military instead of doctors, nurses and the necessary equipment to treat the sick and prevent more Ebola cases?
Despite being massively occupied by foreign armies, it is only now that the WHO announces that the United Kingdom and the United States will begin to build treatment centers in Africa to deal with Ebola patients.
He explained that the decision to build such centers has been adopted to try to attract the largest possible number of international experts.
Many experts are still hesitant to move to the most affected countries since they doubt about the treatment they would receive if contagion occurred, and, above all, the speed with which they would have access to such treatment if they cannot return home promptly.
“There are only a few companies that want to fly to the affected countries like Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea and sometimes many days go by between the moment infection is detected and the repatriation of the patient.”
Aylward denied these centers are built to prevent the virus from spreading in industrialized countries that may intend to repatriate people infected with Ebola.
Spain and the United States are currently dealing with individual cases of two health workers who have been infected after treating Ebola patients who became ill in Africa and who were let into the countries without the proper health precautions.
In the United States, for example, the government has refused to take care of its southern border despite multiple warnings about the possibility that Ebola infected people cross into Texas, Arizona or California. The US has also refused to ban flights from countries that have large numbers of people infected with the virus.
Where is the urgency, then?