Talk:Ebola virus disease

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Ebola virus disease was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
August 7, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted
August 4, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed
In the news News items involving this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on May 30, 2010, and August 5, 2012.
Current status: Former good article nominee
High traffic

On 30 May 2010, Ebola virus disease was linked from Slashdot, a high-traffic website. (See visitor traffic)

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Ebola hemorrhagic fever - replaced by Ebola Virus Disease[edit]

I added 'formerly known as' to the EHF synonym because this is now considered an outdated term as it does not fully reflect the disease (which is only hemorrhagic in about 20% of patients). WHO and CDC are slowly implementing that change on their pages but still have EHF in some places. See [1] and [2]. Tony7444 (talk) 14:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Sure the world has been switching over for many many years. People still use EHF though so it is still currently used. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:16, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ebola virus disease. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Treatment 100% cure Found. Please Update[edit]

http://www.sciencealert.com/researchers-develop-an-ebola-vaccine-that-s-100-percent-effective


It's official: We finally have an Ebola vaccine that's up to 100% effective

23 DEC 2016

Researchers have developed an Ebola vaccine which provides 100 percent protection against one particularly dangerous strain of the disease, based on final field tests on thousands of people in West Africa.

While the vaccine didn't arrive in time to stop the 2014 outbreak that began in Guinea, it could be vital in preventing further epidemics – and public health experts have already stockpiled 300,000 doses of the drug for the next emergency.

Known as rVSV-EBOV, the vaccine prevented the development of Ebola in everyone it was given to during its field test, and its makers are now seeking regulatory approval for the drug so it can be more widely used.

"When the next outbreak hits, we will not be defenceless," lead researcher Marie-Paule Kieny, from the World Health Organisation, told Donald McNeil Jr. at the New York Times.

"The world can’t afford the confusion and human disaster that came with the last epidemic."

Occasional new cases of Ebola are still being reported in Guinea, where researchers trialled a technique called "ring vaccination". That means as soon as someone contracts the disease, the vaccine is given to those they've come into close contact with.

None of the 5,837 people who were given the vaccine had developed Ebola after 10 days, the study found. In contrast there were 23 new Ebola cases among the several thousands of people who didn't get vaccinated.

That's a hugely promising result, but we're not completely rid of Ebola just yet: although rVSV-EBOV works against Zaire ebolavirus, the subtype of Ebola responsible for most human infections, it doesn't work against the other four subtypes.

The drug also leads to some unwelcome side effects, researchers reported, including joint pain and headaches. While that might be okay in the midst of an outbreak, it's going to put off the general population from getting vaccinated in healthier times.

The vaccine is made up of the vesicular stomatitis virus (which harms cattle but doesn't make humans sick) and an Ebola virus surface protein that prompts the human body to produce antibodies.

Now further studies are underway to investigate the vaccine's effects on children and vulnerable subjects (such as those with HIV). The vaccine's backers are hoping to have it submitted for a licence by the end of 2017.

Let's hope this vaccine and others like it are ready in time for the next outbreak.

"Ebola left a devastating legacy in our country," says Director of the National Agency for Health Security in Guinea, KeÏta Sakoba. "We are proud that we have been able to contribute to developing a vaccine that will prevent other nations from enduring what we endured."

The findings of the study have been published in The Lancet.

Yes already in the article. The question is, is it commercially available yet? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:05, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

review[edit]

ref[edit]

  1. ^ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4440555/
  2. ^ http://www.livescience.com/48218-ebola-hemorrhagic-fever.html