CNN: 2 Ebola patients returning to U.S.

[PeterMP]

This 'scientific evidence' is not necessarily abundant in either end. And the NEJM I quoted described a large quarantine maneuver at the first outbreak.

Listen, I asked for the number of volunteers because I couldn't find it readily available. I believe Peter stated a total of about 200. I won't listen to the idea that it may discouraged another 'handful' of volunteers.

What is scientifically documented is the overwhelming lack if early recognition and the ongoing understaffed region.

I did read the various organizations are TRYING to mobilize HELP. Well, I'll say it again, it's a world health emergency and we need paid workers.

In the interim, until more stability established here, hold the line. Let me know when the volunteer line is around the corner, I doubt it it will happen. This isn't 9/11 and the patriotic surge is gonna flush out masses of people.

And flight bans and quarantines are scuentifically accepted to reduce spread of communicable disease. Please don't suggest it won't reduce potential risk here, some of the language used makes it sound like we'll have more cases by January if we did that.

 

1. The situation in Africa is always different the US because of existing infrastructure and wealth, especially with the first Ebola out break because the people involved didn't have a good idea of what they were dealing with in terms of infectious ability.

 

Even Nigeria didn't use quarantines.

 

2. It won't reduce the risk here longer term.  I doubt that there will be more likely to be more out breaks here in January, but it will be more likely to spread in Africa, and then out of Africa and so more infections more places making it more likely to spread here longer term.

 

 

It only reduces risk in the short term.

[sacase]

Why does it matter if she gets sick or not?

 

Her point has nothing to do with the chances of her having the disease.

 

She isn't arguing that she doesn't have to be quarantined because she can't/won't get sick.

Ok so tell me would you be comfortable if I filled your house up and put you and your wife and kids in direct contact with 20 people who just had exposure to Ebola?

 

How do you not understand that this is not about her? This is about public fear.

 

She is to stupid to realize that and that is why she is going to be ostracized. I seriously question her judgement and would not want her anywhere near me if I was in the hospital. 

[Bonez3]

Yea- and thus far nobody is volunteering prior to any drastic restriction, quarantine or flight bans.

Further, you guys are stating WITHOUT scientific evidence that these individuals that either broke reccomeded monitoring or was just plain stupid that they were near certainly a low transmission state.

Fever is absent in 13% of cases in a study of over 600 patients from this epidemic. You still want to share a slice of pizza with Spencer?

Look, we're just getting early info on the variations of this strain. It behaves slightly different than prior outbreaks from clinical perspective.

But if your comfortable with 13% without fever or any real constitutional symptoms, than we disagree.

I just don't see a large volunteer effort regardless of restrictions. And where are all the African health care workers?

[PeterMP]

Yea- and thus far nobody is volunteering prior to any drastic restriction, quarantine or flight bans.

Further, you guys are stating WITHOUT scientific evidence that these individuals that either broke reccomeded monitoring or was just plain stupid that they were near certainly a low transmission state.

Fever is absent in 13% of cases in a study of over 600 patients from this epidemic. You still want to share a slice of pizza with Spencer?

Look, we're just getting early info on the variations of this strain. It behaves slightly different than prior outbreaks from clinical perspective.

But if your comfortable with 13% without fever or any real constitutional symptoms, than we disagree.

I just don't see a large volunteer effort regardless of restrictions. And where are all the African health care workers?

 

What makes you think that 13% didn't have any constitutional symptoms?

 

Fever isn't the only constitutional symptom.

 

(Oh and the 13% was a self reported number including POSSIBLE Ebola patients.  and Spencer DID have a fever so why even bring him up?)

Ok so tell me would you be comfortable if I filled your house up and put you and your wife and kids in direct contact with 20 people who just had exposure to Ebola?

 

How do you not understand that this is not about her? This is about public fear.

 

She is to stupid to realize that and that is why she is going to be ostracized. I seriously question her judgement and would not want her anywhere near me if I was in the hospital. 

 

When somebody makes you let a single person that has been in contact with Ebola into your house let me know.

 

I understand it is about fear.

 

But the answer to fear is not to cave into it.

 

But that doesn't mean we can't and talk about what the actual point of her fight is.

 

Which isn't that she won't get sick.

 

Are we really saying that people are so afraid that they can't even understand what her point is?

 

The basic ability to use logic has been lost?

[Bonez3]

Right, fever is not the only constitutional symptom. In subsequent studies after fever other more ubiquitous symptoms become far less prevalent. With diarrhea, abdominal pain and vomitting all 50% or less.

The next most common symptoms are headache, weakness and dizziness... Jeez, that could be overlooked for a while.

Look, I don't even know why this needs qualifying. A subsequent analysis from Africa this week had 89% fevers and were in EDV ward.

It just means that individuals may be able to 'ride it out' before more obvious symptoms become evident. The transmit ability is not entirely related to fever and there is adequate scientific evidence to suggest relatively well appearing and feeling carriers are very much possible.

And I bring Spencer up because supporters of self monitoring stated how he contacted authorities a day after fevers. Well, maybe he was a little weak 8 days before that. And given his track record, whose gonna believe him now. Further, I remember reading that he entered the 'critical phase' about 3 days (i dont know exactly, but seemed early)into admission. Seemed early to hear that. Made me GUESS he probably was sucker longer. So, I bring him up because his loads may have been higher than the self monitoring are set up to catch.

[PeterMP]

Right, fever is not the only constitutional symptom. In subsequent studies after fever other more ubiquitous symptoms become far less prevalent. With diarrhea, abdominal pain and vomitting all 50% or less.

The next most common symptoms are headache, weakness and dizziness... Jeez, that could be overlooked for a while.

Look, I don't even know why this needs qualifying. A subsequent analysis from Africa this week had 89% fevers and were in EDV ward.

It just means that individuals may be able to 'ride it out' before more obvious symptoms become evident. The transmit ability is not entirely related to fever and there is adequate scientific evidence to suggest relatively well appearing and feeling carriers are very much possible.

 

The 89% is at presentation.  Presentation means that the person felt poorly enough to go seek medical help.  They weren't "riding it out".  

 

It also doesn't mean they also didn't get a fever later that day or even had a fever the day before.  At the time they felt poorly enough to seek medical attention and were able to, they didn't have a fever.

 

There is no real scientific evidence to suggest relative well appearing and feeling carriers can transmit the disease.

 

Duncan had a fever and was vomiting before he went to the hospital.  None of the people that dealt with him before he went to the hospital or even his initial presentation at the hospital have gotten sick.

 

He was so sick that they called an ambulance for him.

 

Pham, Duncan, and Vinison all were not quarantined and lived in a heavily populated area.  Nobody has gotten sick from them.

 

We're even now close to the 50% point for Spencer and nobody has gotten sick

 

How many people have been "exposed"?

 

Hundreds?  Thousands maybe?

 

How many have gotten sick?

 

The odds are extremely small at best.

 

All sorts of things might happen, but for obvious reasons people tend to like to focus on what actually appears to happen.

[twa]

 

Even though Duncan was out of walking around for days with an Ebola induced fever and was vomitting and Pham flew on an air plane and Spencer did all of the things he did, we still have ZERO people that have gotten Ebola that weren't carrying for a late term Ebola patient.

 

And the same case is true for Spain.

 

They way you present the risk tends to lead to why we are acting as if Ebola is a crisis at all?

 

Just be vigilant and treat those needed if it appears.....no worries

 

 

our medical superiority means ebola is just another disease.....get a flu shot and be happy

[Bonez3]

Right, at presentation, and fever seems to be one marker for fatal outcome. So, without more info, we can't say that they weren't riding it out until fever struck, than the outcome is poor because loads are high.

Hey, I'm glad Duncan's family is well. We don't know interactions there. But we do know the 1 patient in a community hospital setting confected 2 workers, and that's bad numbers Peter. Part of my reasoning to get healthcare system better prepared to treat.

They way you present the risk tends to lead to why we are acting as if Ebola is a crisis at all?

Just be vigilant and treat those needed if it appears.....no worries

our medical superiority means ebola is just another disease.....get a flu shot and be happy

I kinda feel this way. And I'm not trying to be the polar opposite. And I recognize the need to approach this in calculated fashion. But I understand his points and I know he recognizes the severity if this

[PeterMP]

They way you present the risk tends to lead to why we are acting as if Ebola is a crisis at all?

 

Just be vigilant and treat those needed if it appears.....no worries

 

 

our medical superiority means ebola is just another disease.....get a flu shot and be happy

 

In the US, it isn't a crisis.

 

One person has died.  They are reporting that Spencer is getting better, and he's over a week in.  If he's getting better at this point in time, it is very unlikely he's going to die.

 

What other thing in the history of the US has been considered a crisis because 1 person has died?

 

In western Africa, Ebola is a crisis.

 

But getting clean drinking water is a crisis in parts of Africa too.

 

It is something we need to be careful about.  It is something we should work on being prepared for.

 

But that doesn't make it a crisis.

[PeterMP]

Right, at presentation, and fever seems to be one marker for fatal outcome. So, without more info, we can't say that they weren't riding it out until fever struck, than the outcome is poor because loads are high.

Hey, I'm glad Duncan's family is well. We don't know interactions there. But we do know the 1 patient in a community hospital setting confected 2 workers, and that's bad numbers Peter. Part of my reasoning to get healthcare system better prepared to treat.

I kinda feel this way. And I'm not trying to be the polar opposite. And I recognize the need to approach this in calculated fashion. But I understand his points and I know he recognizes the severity if this

 

1. A fever at presentation was NOT associated with a fatal out come.  ONLY for cases where the fever was over 100.4 had such an association.

 

2.  The health care system in general is better prepared to treat Ebola patients then it was.

 

And the other number we know is from those 2, we got 0 sick people.  There has been no propagation of the disease from them.

 

That's an indication of the increased preparedness in the system.

 

But I agree, I think it could be even better prepared, and it makes more sense to have authorities working on that then baby sitting people that have extremely small odds of getting anybody else sick in their current state.

 

Rather than baby sitting asymptomatic people that have been exposed to Ebola, authorities would be better off walking into local health care facilities and saying this person has been exposed to Ebola and has a fever, what are you going to do?

 

And then seeing how they respond.

 

Are they actually ready if a likely Ebola patient walks in the door?

 

But instead of doing that, we are worried about baby sitting people that have extremely low odds of passing the disease along.

[chipwhich]

PeterMP sounds like the typical liberal and ACLU fan that doesn't care if a child molester lives near an elementary school.

No harm, no foul.

[PeterMP]

PeterMP sounds like the typical liberal and ACLU fan that doesn't care if a child molester lives near an elementary school.

No harm, no foul.

 

The rate at which people convicted of pedlphilia are repeat offenders is much greater than 1/(#of people exposed to a person with an early Ebola infection in western nations (which is at least in the hundreds))

 

Where the chances of getting Ebola in those circumstances is even lower than that because it hasn't happened yet.

 

We're at zero, zip, none, nada.

[sacase]

What makes you think that 13% didn't have any constitutional symptoms?

 

Fever isn't the only constitutional symptom.

 

(Oh and the 13% was a self reported number including POSSIBLE Ebola patients.  and Spencer DID have a fever so why even bring him up?)

 

When somebody makes you let a single person that has been in contact with Ebola into your house let me know.

 

I understand it is about fear.

 

But the answer to fear is not to cave into it.

 

But that doesn't mean we can't and talk about what the actual point of her fight is.

 

Which isn't that she won't get sick.

 

Are we really saying that people are so afraid that they can't even understand what her point is?

 

The basic ability to use logic has been lost?

 

Ahh this tells me exactly where you stand in this. Its OK for everyone else, just not my family. Way to avoid answering my question. I would say you missed the point, but you are smart enough to know exactly my  point which is why you refused to answer it. People know her point, but just like you wouldn't let her live in your house. People don't want her near them. Yes when a solution involves people basic logic hardly works. Ever hear the expression, good in theory, bad in practice? People are the wild card. For whatever reason you do not want to acknowledge that fact. 

[PeterMP]

Ahh this tells me exactly where you stand in this. Its OK for everyone else, just not my family. Way to avoid answering my question. I would say you missed the point, but you are smart enough to know exactly my  point which is why you refused to answer it. People know her point, but just like you wouldn't let her live in your house. People don't want her near them. Yes when a solution involves people basic logic hardly works. Ever hear the expression, good in theory, bad in practice? People are the wild card. For whatever reason you do not want to acknowledge that fact. 

 

It is as okay for my family as everybody else.  I live near Philadelphia.  Yesterday we went into Philadelphia and ate lunch at a very popular and very crowded place.  There are several very good hospitals in the city alone and more in the region.  I'd be actually be shocked if nobody from the region hasn't been to west Africa.  Much less it is a major metropolitan region that does attract its share of immigrants.

 

I'm perfectly fine with the idea that the person that me and my kids were standing in line with to get ice cream may have been in Liberia last week.

 

Friday, I had my kids at a very large and crowded regional mall.  I'm perfectly fine with the idea that the person walking down the mall concourse next to us might have been in Liberia last week.

 

If I wasn't, I wouldn't have taken them.

 

I don't have any special money, power, or ability to shield my kids/family from people, and I'm not taking any special precautions.

 

If I was taking my family and going to a private Caribbean island, while saying the rest of you have to take the chance of interacting with people that have been exposed to Ebola, you might have a point, but that's not the case.

 

Nobody is telling you that you have to let somebody exposed to Ebola into your house.  Nobody is even telling you that you have to go to crowded and/or confined spaces.

 

I'm not for asking or receiving and special treatment for my family or even taking any extra special precautions.

 

**EDIT**

This link says that there are currently 105 people being monitored with respect to Ebola in PA, and there is no quarantine practice set up for flying into the Philadelphia airport or PA in general.

 

http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/7041469-74/health-state-ebola#axzz3HvAvlTlL

 

My family is still being active in popular and crowded activities around the Philadelphia region and that will only pick up as we do more holiday related activities in the city itself.

 

I live in NJ, and I'm embarrassed by the quarantine (I live in NJ, but work in PA and we do a lot of activities in PA) and have contacted my elected officials.

[Bonez3]

Still alot of 'could do this', and 'stepped up' monitoring. And why so many recent changes. What's the cost of that vs flight bans. About a 100 travelers daily. Hmmm, not a meter mover. But, certainly there are high risk patients in this group.

Tell me again why we're monitoring here? Oh yea, we don't want to discourage the couple hundred volunteers that have been there over the last 11 months.

You cite 3-4 cases here that had no transmissions yet. 4 cases! At that was healthcare workers. And there was mismanagement there.

Yea, we should feel better because Duncan's family is ok, and Pham's bridal party is healthy and Spencer's bowling team is showing no signs. All 3 cases could have been prevented.

What do you think the cost was and is ongoing for this error? Compare that to restricting 100 or so travelers from West Africa for indefinite period.

And yes, fever was a marker for case fatality based on known outcomes from analysis.

To be embarrassed by NJs actions seems agenda driven. TWA already cited you a novel prize winning member of the scientific field in this area that agrees. Why would you be embarrassed to agree with him?

It's ok to question the answers.

[PeterMP]

Still alot of 'could do this', and 'stepped up' monitoring. And why so many recent changes. What's the cost of that vs flight bans. About a 100 travelers daily. Hmmm, not a meter mover. But, certainly there are high risk patients in this group.

Monitoring is cheap. You show up somewhere where there is already staff present and somebody takes your temperature using equipment that is going to present anyway, and it takes 5 minutes.

Even if you want the nurse to go their home, it isn't really an issue.

My mom is a travelling nurse for a state health department. She's already being paid, she's already travelling, and she can take somebody's temperature.

 

Tell me again why we're monitoring here? Oh yea, we don't want to discourage the couple hundred volunteers that have been there over the last 11 months.

And we don't want people feeling like they can't tell us they are from western Africa and not come in and they try and enter illegally or in a manner where they hide their point of origin, which makes it harder to track them.

 

You cite 3-4 cases here that had no transmissions yet. 4 cases! At that was healthcare workers. And there was mismanagement there.

Duncan wasn't a healthcare worker, and do you really want to claim that non-healthcare workers would have behaved differently.

Right, there are lot's of non-healthcare workers in here claiming they would have been smart enough not to get on the plane?

And it isn't just four. There is not a single known case of an asymptomatic person passing Ebola onto somebody else.

There's none. Even when people do things like go out of their way to infect the lungs of monkeys with Ebola, they don't pass it on in a manner where the things in the lungs/mouth are infectious.

And the Spanish nurse's aid makes 5 clear cases in the west where there was no quarantine and nobody else has gotten sick from an asymptomatic person.

 

Yea, we should feel better because Duncan's family is ok, and Pham's bridal party is healthy and Spencer's bowling team is showing no signs. All 3 cases could have been prevented.

What do you think the cost was and is ongoing for this error? Compare that to restricting 100 or so travelers from West Africa for indefinite period.

What error?

Longer term, the costs are going to greater as I've explained extensively in this thread. If you restrict flight to West Africa, you are going to make it more likely to spread via direct affects (numbers of people on the ground actually helping and suppliers) and indirect affects (e.g. negatively affect the economies in and around W. Africa making them less likely to deal with the issue and prevent its spreading).

 

And yes, fever was a marker for case fatality based on known outcomes from analysis.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1411680

"The only symptoms that were significantly associated with a fatal outcome were weakness (P=0.003), dizziness (P=0.01), and diarrhea (P=0.04). Among patients with diarrhea, 94% died, whereas only 65% of those without diarrhea on presentation died. Evidence of bleeding was noted in only 1 patient."

"Any fever at presentation was not associated with a fatal outcome. However, a temperature above 38°C (100.4°F) had such an association."

To be embarrassed by NJs actions seems agenda driven. TWA already cited you a novel prize winning member of the scientific field in this area that agrees. Why would you be embarrassed to agree with him?

Because the evidence doesn't support his argument, and it is a poorly thought out position not based on facts.

Which is clear if you bother to consider the basic features of the argument?

Again, why 21 days?

What makes that the magic number?

Logical fallacies argument from authority:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

"A is an authority on a particular topic

A says something about that topic

A is probably correct"

The fact that my governor thinks that is a good way to make an argument at all is somewhat embarrassing.

Did I answer all of your questions?

[Bonez3]

Vital signs were recorded at presentation and every 6 hours thereafter. A fever (temperature, >38.4°C [101.1°F]) was recorded at the time of initial presentation in 13% of the patients, whereas a temperature of 38°C (100.4°F) or more was noted in 29%. Temperature was the only vital sign that correlated with survival (Figure 3A, and Table S6 in the Supplementary Appendix). The mean temperature at the time of admission was significantly higher among patients who died than among those who survived (37.5°C [99.5°F] vs. 35.9°C [96.6°F], P=0.001). A review of all vital signs that were recorded showed that 20 patients had at least one temperature reading of 38.3°C or more during their hospital course. All but 5 patients met the criteria for relative bradycardia, with a mean temperature of 38.9±0.5°C (102.0±32.9°F) and a mean heart rate of 87±17.8 beats per minute (Figure S8 in the Supplementary Appendix).15 There were no significant differences between case patients with fatal EVD and those with nonfatal EVD with respect to other vital signs (Figure 3B through 3F).

With all due respect... There is a paucity of scientific evidence and you seem to think it all supports less strict measures. Above is from same article and fever is definitely statistically sugnificant

Further, NEJM did find avg incubation 6-12 days I believe. And the costs of all those healthcare workers that now must be monitored. Should Hickox be allowed to treat patients within that 21 or even longer window. Really?

And again, where is the African Nations responses? The have plenty if skilled providers.

And yea- people already lied to get into the country. Nothing is gonna change. The reason I cited healthcare workers because the general pop expected more from them and they failed. The error? How bout misdiagnosing Ebola? Going to pizzeria and bowling alley when you're entering EVD? Flying with a low grade fever (really, WTF??) I would loved to sit next to her and strikes up small talk. 'Yea, I treated Duncan. Is it hot in here?'

Go ahead man, beat that drum... Nobody's been infected by them. That's great

[twa]

 

And we don't want people feeling like they can't tell us they are from western Africa and not come in and they try and enter illegally or in a manner where they hide their point of origin, which makes it harder to track them.

 

 

 

 by the criteria you put forth on the risk why would it matter if they came here?

 

after all Duncan.....yada yada

[Special K]

PeterMP sounds like the typical liberal and ACLU fan that doesn't care if a child molester lives near an elementary school.

No harm, no foul.

Totally uncalled for.

 

It's ok to have an intelligent discussion about this without throwing ridiculous insults around, particularly against a poster who knows way more than you with what he's talking about with regard to this subject.

[Special K]

Just to throw out there, for the people accusing Peter, and I'm sure soon me as well, I was in a meeting last week with a health care worker officially being monitored by our health department because she returned from Guinea 2 weeks ago.  Same room, same table, we breathed the same air, drank from the same pitcher of water, etc.  I wasn't and am still not worried at all.  The amount of freaking out people, even intelligent people, are doing over this is really incredible to me.

[Bonez3]

I don't think there's accusation needed, a solitary post does not blanket the vast majority of conversation.

There's not a right and wrong here either IMO. The fact you drank a glass of water with someone from endemic area doesn't discredit the potential of this virus.

I like to say my stance is not based on fear or freaking out. I've listened to both sides and respect and understand it, I like one side better than other.

[PeterMP]

Temperature was the only vital sign that correlated with survival (Figure 3A, and Table S6 in the Supplementary Appendix).

Here's what you said before:

"Right, at presentation, and fever seems to be one marker for fatal outcome. So, without more info, we can't say that they weren't riding it out until fever struck, than the outcome is poor because loads are high."

Having a fever is NOT a marker for a fatal out come. If I tell you if the person has a fever or not, you can not tell me if the person is more likely to die. The ONLY point in time in which it becomes of an indicator of death is when it reaches the temperature given in the other posts.

 

With all due respect... There is a paucity of scientific evidence and you seem to think it all supports less strict measures. Above is from same article and fever is definitely statistically sugnificant.

There isn't a paucity of scientific evidence with respect to its transmittance (and much of anything else really with respect to it).

We have quite a bit of experience of it in its natural setting and even more in labs with primates.

The fact of the matter is that people have developed what they think will be various treatments/vaccines for it. The only reason it didn't further is because industry hasn't wanted to spend money.

A fever isn't statistically significant. If somebody has a low fever, they are not more likely to die than somebody that has no fever.

 

Further, NEJM did find avg incubation 6-12 days I believe. And the costs of all those healthcare workers that now must be monitored. Should Hickox be allowed to treat patients within that 21 or even longer window. Really?

Monitoring them is going to be cheaper than quarantining them. Monitoring them is cheap.

Monitoring them is going to be cheaper longer term then letting it spread in Africa.

 

And again, where is the African Nations responses? The have plenty if skilled providers.

I have no idea of how many skilled workers there are in Africa or how many excess people they have, and if you think it matters and you have the figures, then you can post them.

But I don't think it matters. In general, there has been an AWFUL decision making with respect to HIV/AIDS in Africa. To argue that this is what African nations are doing with respect to HIV/AIDS and so we should act similarly would be INCREDIBLY STUPID.

If the African nations are using similar decision making processes with respect to how to deal with Ebola, then I have no problem saying that their decisions should have zero impact on ours.

 

Go ahead man, beat that drum... Nobody's been infected by them. That's great

Nobody has been infected by them and there is no evidence of anybody ever being infected by an asymptomatic Ebola patient.

They are clear cases backing up the scientific evidence that we already have.

There is not a paucity of scientific information on the infectiousness of asymptomatic people with Ebola.

We had a lot and have now even gained more.

 

**EDIT**

I will point out that I've voted for Chris Christie for governor twice.

[Special K]

I don't think there's accusation needed, a solitary post does not blanket the vast majority of conversation.

There's not a right and wrong here either IMO. The fact you drank a glass of water with someone from endemic area doesn't discredit the potential of this virus.

I like to say my stance is not based on fear or freaking out. I've listened to both sides and respect and understand it, I like one side better than other.

My post wasn't directed toward you.  Rather, it was directed toward the people accusing Peter (and others saying these mandatory isolation/quarantines are unnecessary) of taking NIMBY/ACLU/"liberal" positions.  Peter described how he had no qualms about taking his family out in public and I wanted to add that I too am not worried about potential public contact with people returning from outbreak zones.  My example was not intended to give the impression that I don't think this virus is serious and/or shouldn't be taken seriously as that would be wholly inconsistent with all of my other posts on this topic.

[twa]

I hope ya'll are right,but I don't think the science is as clear as you claim on transmission being limited to symptomatic sources

why would ebola be that different from other filoviruses with regards to inapparent infections

 

http://www.virology.ws/2009/02/13/acute-viral-infections/

http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/3/1051.full

[Special K]

I hope ya'll are right,but I don't think the science is as clear as you claim on transmission being limited to symptomatic sources

why would ebola be that different from other filoviruses with regards to inapparent infections

 

http://www.virology.ws/2009/02/13/acute-viral-infections/

http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/3/1051.full

The second study you've linked discusses the Norovirus, which is not a member of the Filoviridae family.  I guess I'm confused as to why you are trying to compare that with hemorrhagic fever viruses.