Risk of Getting Ebola on a Plane

ebola

With Ebola in the United States, I think it is all of our business to understand the risks of the disease should it spread rapidly like it has in Africa. At this point, I don’t believe there is reason for alarm, but education is prudent. We all need to understand the disease so we can take precautions and prevent its spread.

I also don’t believe in causing panic or fear as that will help no one. We need to smart, get educated, pay attention and make sure we know what are up against so we can fight it as a nation should we become unable to contain it, and win.

When I saw this video on CNN, I was frankly appalled. This doctor, Dr. Suzanne Donovan, an infectious disease specialist who treated people in Africa, is as evasive as anyone can be. This doesn’t help calm people’s fears at all. She doesn’t directly answer ANY questions asked of her, but instead she deflects them. She doesn’t lie, but she is not straight forward either, and by this I am troubled. I can’t help but wonder if she is somehow invested in, connected to, or involved with the airline industry by her responses alone.

When the reporter asks Suzanne what if you are flying next to someone who is showing Ebola symptoms, “Any chance you can get it?”  Listen to what Dr. Donovan says.  She says, “This is something that is transmitted with direct contact of body fluids.”

She doesn’t answer the question that if you are exposed to direct contact of a sick person’s body fluids you CAN get it. She stops short. The CNN reporter questions her further.

The reporter says if bodily fluids from a sick passenger next to you gets on the tray or the armrest and you touch it, and touch your nose or mouth, can you get it?

Again Dr. Donovan doesn’t answer the question. She says, “You are bringing up very rare scenarios, and again I would say you are at greater risk driving to the airport and getting in a car accident then being infected with Ebola by being on an airplane.”

Why can’t she tell us the truth?  Yes, you can get it.

Twice now Dr. Donovan avoids answering the question, and instead makes another statement that is related to the question, but is completely different, albeit true. I find this outrageous!!!  This is not helping the public any.  She is technical correct in her statement, but avoids answering the question completely which is very misleading and dangerous!

The reporter says what about the fabric of the plane? What if bodily fluids get on the fabric of the seats, what’s the probability of you getting it?

Again, this woman refuses to answer the question. She says, “It’s very susceptible to cleaning agents.” She then goes on to talk about how washing your hands with soap and water will kill the virus. And that’s true. But if you touch a freshly contaminated surface unknowingly, and rub your eyes before you wash your hands, you are at risk to catch Ebola. Anyone who has done any reading lately should know this.  Who does this woman think she is fooling?

The fact that she doesn’t tell us the true risks involved, even if she says they are rare, is flat out unprofessional.

I find that evasive actions such as Dr. Donovan’s can actually cause more problems than good and are more harmful than helpful. Many people will say “the doctor said” without realizing she didn’t. She didn’t answer any questions that were asked of her. She instead made statements that were connected but different avoiding giving any answers at all!

Today you are absolutely much more likely to get into a car accident on your way to the airport than you are to catch Ebola.  But that doesn’t change the fact that if you sit next to someone who is symptomatic, and has Ebola (which is very rare and unlikely today) that you can catch it. Especially if you are in direct contact with body fluids from that person, and touch your nose, mouth, or eyes unknowingly before you wash your hands. Ebola can live on surfaces for limited times.

This interview stinks to high heaven if you ask me. There was an ulterior motive for doing it, and it wasn’t for the benefit of the public to become educated.

That’s disturbing to me.

11 replies
  1. remi
    remi says:

    Thank you for both articles on the subject. I always get educated on something from you & your readers, and I appreciate good facts. They are a little hard to come by. I remember being so afraid of west Nile virus when it came to my state. Not for myself, but my children. As I took them for flu shots last week I wondered if Ebola is something I can somehow protect them against, other than the usual hand washing ect.. but listening to this lady dance around a direct answer is just going to scare people further. I hope she’s proud of herself. I would like to hear airlines talk about sanitation procedures between flights that assures ur seat isn’t contaminated? How to protect yourself from the people unwillingly sick around you perhaps? Not someone telling you it won’t happen.

  2. Paul Flanagan
    Paul Flanagan says:

    She didn’t even answer the first question directly. What I’m really concerned about is everyone telling me not to panic. Thank you very much. Noted. The public address system in The World Trade Towers was telling people not to panic and stay where they were too. If I had been there, I probably would have listened. Panicking isn’t a useful state, but there is cause for concern, right? I think this woman is lying. And by lying, I mean being deceptive–Withholding information. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth–FAIL! If somebody shoots a gun, and you are in the vicinity, you could get shot and die, right? I exaggerate, but that’s the question. She won’t lay an honest foundation. I’d like to hear the absolute worst case scenario from someone in detail. Why haven’t we heard that? We deserve that truth too. I don’t think this woman works for the airlines or cares about them any more than anything else. She’s odd. I’m not overly concerned about this, but I just don’t like being kid-gloved like I’m an idiot. It seems there are many people who don’t trust the public with the straight facts, and even when some facts trickle out, they are buttressed with, “You have a greater chance being struck by…” This thing could get out of hand and that’s a real possibility. I don’t think it’s a probability though. Is that so risky to say?

    • Eyes for Lies
      Eyes for Lies says:

      That’s not too risky to say. I think everyone wishes she just would have said this is how you can get it. Could you get it this way? Yes. But the odds are very remote that (A) you’ll fly next to someone with Ebola, and (B) that you will get it. You are more likely to die in a car crash statistically speaking today. If you say only 3 people out of 300M have it — that’s statistically non-existent!

      Everyone would be at ease. Instead, she causes everyone to go why is she not stating the obvious?! What’s wrong? What am I missing?!! What is she afraid of? What’s happening?

      She made me realize how much the airlines have at stake here and how an outbreak bigger than what we’ve seen now, but not huge could throw our economy into serious, serious trouble — risking services we depend on not pulling through such as airlines. If someone gets Ebola from traveling on a plane — it could take out several airlines! Like right now, look at the Texas hospital. They are saying it is a ghost town now–no one will go there. Scary on that level alone and I think that is what motivated this, but what she did was the exact opposite thing!

      • Brent
        Brent says:

        Another good post Eyes. The field of deception detection is wide ranging. Her message is it’s safe to fly, the risk is low – keep flying. The reporter asked some good questions but didn’t press for the answers.

  3. Karon
    Karon says:

    I think the likelihood of people getting Ebola was underplayed at the beginning, but when the second nurse came down with it, everyone said wait a minute! I think the worst facts about the contagiousness of the disease have been hidden from us for several reasons. One reason is the fact that this is happening so close to the mid-term elections. People are asking hard questions about why our government didn’t have better information and why exact plans of how to handle this disease wasn’t worked out months ago. As Eyes said, airlines want to play this down, also. In fact, the list of businesses, such as vacation spots, cruise ships, and the list goes on and on.

    I know they don’t want people to panic, but there would be less panic if we had the unvarnished, true facts. Uncertainty, and the overall feeling that we are being jerked around by different people with their own agendas leaves us disgusted, uncertain and scared.
    The simple fact is that we have too many people, and that includes the medical profession that are not sure of what they are doing. It is try this, one day, then try this the next day.

  4. josh
    josh says:

    Her eyes kind of freak me out, but they look more like the result of a physical condition of some sort. I am curious whether you could end up having eyes like this as the result of internal emotional stress, or do they result just from physical causes, and, do they have any effect, either way, on whether or not you can tell if she is being honest.

  5. Mike Sokoll
    Mike Sokoll says:

    I know its not a funny subject but it is hard not to laugh…this is what happens when a medical professional tries to quell panic and not say anything scary while at the same time avoiding an outright lie. Bottom line is “bodily fluids” exist in minute quantities in our exhalations…so they say you have to have ‘direct contact with bodily fluids’ and then say ‘you can’t contract ebola by sitting next to someone.’ They don’t say what quantity of bodily fluid or how long it can exist on a surface or outside our bodies…they don’t even seem to identify the mechanism or environmental factor by which the virus dies. Is it excessive or deficient oxygen? Cold temperatures? Lack of cellular material? Exposure to uv light? PH balance? What causes it to die if it is on a surface?

    So far no single medical professional or media outlet has addressed the not very far fetched hypothetical “what if someone infected breathes on me for an hour?” The whole question response cycle in the media seems like a setup for the inevitable; “oh you got sick from someone sitting next to you? Then you most have had direct contact with his fluids…no, no, it isn’t cause he breathed on you.”

    Feels a lot like an old school religious charlatan that promises to heal the crippled if you just believe hard enough…then if/when they fail blame the victim. Next person to pull that should have to ride on a bus unprotected sitting right next to the victim.

    I would also like to understand how they can claim to “know” with any certainty that this virus transmits only through direct contact with bodily fluids and never via aersol. It takes decades and countless studies for the government and medical establishment to definitively state anything with certainty (smoking, obesity, cholesterol, asbestos, OSHA). Even the question of how AIDS/HIV spread took a relatively long time to establish. So…how can you study a disease transmission vector in humans without an outbreak?

    The whole question about clean up and persistence is another evasion even though it is a far more plausible statement. “The virus is very susceptible to soap and water.” The right question here is how long will it live if it doesn’t come into contact with soap and water?

    The questions being asked are also suspect as all get out. The interviewer is running off a script and carefully avoids a number of questions with wide ranging implications. I am not a genius but I do travel from time to time; if I can come up with the above questions why couldn’t any reporter?…and since there are literally tens of thousands of reporters, bloggers, media personnel, etc. covering this story why haven’t these and other questions been asked. Kind of makes you wonder how carefully these interviews are scripted. Feels like there are multiple parties with a distinct interest in spinning the message.

  6. Laurie Thomas
    Laurie Thomas says:

    It’s not at all disturbing to me, but I’ve worked in medical publishing for 25 years and I’ve edited a lot of journal articles and textbook chapters about various kinds of infectious disease. She doesn’t want to say that there is zero chance of something happening, because “there is nothing in biology that never happens.” However, the chance of catching Ebola from someone who isn’t obviously seriously ill is so remote that no sane person would worry about it.

  7. Laurie Thomas
    Laurie Thomas says:

    Here’s a story about a child who became symptomatic with Ebola on a long bus trip in Africa. Nobody caught it from her. So the chances of someone catching Ebola from sitting next to an asymptomatic person on a much shorter trip would be far smaller than that. I was delighted to see that the Malians refuse to give up their traditional obligation to provide hospitality, even in the face of Ebola. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/11/health/quick-response-and-old-fashioned-detective-work-thwart-ebola-in-mali.html?action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&region=Footer&module=TopNews&pgtype=article

  8. Amy Unruh
    Amy Unruh says:

    Just from the eyes, she looks scared. Maybe there’s a good reason why she’s answering questions like this. Of course, I’m only going off of a picture.

Comments are closed.