Three questions

(3), means at any given time somebody or rather many somebody's will be infected somewhere in Africa that will keep the virus alive and moving around like a ping-pong ball in a dryer, taking down individuals and clusters of people indefinately but not necessarily massively such as an epidemic. I do not believe endemic in this case means long term asymptomatic carriers.

(2), in the US CDC guidelines, an Ebola victim may be buried but only after being double bagged and placed in a hermetically sealed coffin. Such a coffin is considered fail-safe for above ground viewing. As I've read the way many Africans have been buried may present numerous problems. 6 feet down is pretty deep for most though I don't know about all critters. Fluids in the ground tend to drain straight down, not sideways or up but special circumstances may exist in some of the locations that may expose leakage. The virus without freeze-drying or keeping at very cold temps will corrupt and decompose in days to a few months. I believe. So I don't think there is a longterm risk. But in the days after burial there must be some risk.

And (3), it loaded up in half a second on my iPhone. I used your link. Don't know what to tell you about that.

These are just my opinions based on some facts I'm aware of. Others may have a much more precise or accurate answer to your questions.

On 3, not that I disagree with you because I don't, out of curiosity why not a asymptomatic "typhoid Mary"

Asymptomatic individuals have been found in previous outbreaks. Also natural immunity to the virus has been studied. Here is 2 studies of interest.

Study 1

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(00)02405-3/fulltext

The data in this paper is from 2 Gabon outbreaks of Ebola Zaire (1996). 119 patients with clinical symptoms, and a further 24 cases of proven seroconversion but asymptomatic infection. So about 1 in 6.

These 24 asymptomatic patients did not have prior immunity to Ebola as they initially produced IgM. ( if IgM antibodies predominate then this is an earlier primary immune response, an initial exposure not an IgG memory response).

So infection in non immune induviduals need not produce disease.

Disappointingly the paper did not address if asymptomatic infected people could shed and pass on the virus, which I think would have been a key question.


So there is a possibility that asymptomatic infected superspreaders exist....not a nice thought...hopefully viral load and shedding would be too low in asymptomatic carriers, but perhaps something they should be looking at.


STUDY 2
This one was done in 2010

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0009126


So this was a large 3 year serological survey of rural populations in Gabon. It tested 4,349 individuals from 220 villages for the presence of ZEBOV-specific IgG ( indicating a past exposure to Ebola). Found unexpected high total overall seroprevalence of 15.3%. The seroprevalence rate was significantly higher in forested areas (19.4%) than in other ecosystems, namely grassland (12.4%), savannah (10.5%), and lakeland (2.%). Authors then conducted other tests to make sure the specificity and functionality of the villager's anti-ZEBOV IgG was genuine. Paper concluded that a large fraction of the human population living in forested areas of Gabon had both natural humoral and cellular immunity to ZEBOV.

So all these people had previous exposure but no sickness and were now in effect naturally vaccinated, so what was going on. The authors concluded the high prevalence of “immune” persons suggests a common source of human exposure such as fruits contaminated by bat saliva. This low level of exposure in theory could generate a protective immunisation, but not cause disease. This means new insights into ZEBOV circulation and the existence of natural protective immunization.

My one criticism is they did not do a sample population from a urban European population which would have added to their natural environmental exposure immunization theory. Also the saliva on fruit is just a theory not proven or tested yet.

Also adds another worrisome slant, were it to ever reach a European or US or Asian population with perhaps less natural immunity. ( as far as we know we don't live near Ebola infected bats)....Well I will leave that thought there....let's hope we have other genetic traits that may protect us.

So in summary these papers are actually talking about 2 different things. The first is individuals who get infected during an outbreak but despite having no pre existing immunity they dont get sick. The second is about levels of natural immunity in a studied population.

Anyway....I am boring you now.

Not boring at all! Very interesting and thought provoking! Thanks!

In 1990/1991 I was an immunized doner. About ten gallons of immunized plasma in one year. They told me I was either born immune, vaccinated or had been exposed and became immune, to Hep B. so they ran me through the two or three vaccine regiment (can't remember) getting my titer up to 500,000 and drew about a liter of plasma twice a week for the next year. If I remember correctly this is the only vaccine in the world that uses human blood to create. Or did. These immune people in the forest, their blood should be carefully studied for maybe making a vaccine. If it can be done and ebola escapes Africa then these extremely poor people should be paid handsomely for selling their life saving blood. They need the money. Let the rich people donate blood. Let the poor people sell it. Whatever but get er done.

Hazelpad thought provoking replies.