Ebola outbreak projections for the United States defy CDC's false assurances

Friday, October 17, 2014
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Tags: Ebola outbreak, projections, United States

---

(NaturalNews) After watching the testimony of CDC director Tom Frieden (and others) before a congressional committee today, it is abundantly obvious that no official source is going to tell the truth about the realistic danger of an exploding Ebola outbreak in the United States. Under the leadership of Frieden, the CDC has reached a state of delusional denial that staggers the mind, continuing to insist that Ebola cannot be spread through indirect contact (i.e. via contaminated surfaces).

The droning mantra of the CDC has now become, "We will consider any options that help reduce risk to Americans." Yet somehow those options do not include air travel isolation -- a fundamental tool in halting any pandemic outbreak.

The official CDC / government position

The U.S. government has gone from saying that Ebola won't ever come to America to saying Ebola is now in America but is completely under control. Now that the virus keeps infecting surprising numbers of new victims, the new spin offered in today's congressional testimony is, "American will not experience a serious Ebola outbreak."

With the CDC leading the blind charge, the U.S. government has now officially adopted a position of quack science denial of reality. It is now perfectly clear to everyone who understands the principles of virology and disease outbreaks that every claim and assurance now uttered by the CDC must be immediately assumed to be a half-truth. Unlike with the hoaxed swine flu pandemic where the CDC was madly hyping up a largely fictional pandemic in order to create demand for more vaccines, the CDC is now fully invested in "downplay" mode, resorting to denials and obfuscations instead of the exaggerations we're used to hearing from the CDC.

This increasingly convinces me that this Ebola outbreak is not only very real but actually far worse than we are being told. "Never believe something is true," the saying goes, "until the government officially denies it." And today, the CDC is adamantly denying that the Ebola outbreak taking place in America right now is any problem at all.

Why I'm thankful for frontline CDC workers even though I strongly disagree with CDC leadership

I want to clarify that my criticism of the CDC is solely directed at the CDC leadership and not the rank-and-file CDC scientists and workers who are legitimately trying to save lives. They deserve our thanks and support for working extremely long hours in their attempts to halt this pandemic, even if they have been misled by their employer and not told the truth about the origins of this Ebola strain.

Sadly, these people are working under the leadership of a government department that seems to deliberately want Ebola to spread. Why else would the agency still refuse to recommend BSL-4 biohazard gear for all medical staffers treating Ebola patients? Why else would the CDC continue to ridiculously insist that Ebola cannot be spread via contaminated medical gear or surfaces? The agency's foolish clinging to the exclusivity of the "direct contact" theory of Ebola transmission is already proving disastrous. How long will it take for the CDC to finally admit that its direct contact theory is flatly false?

Because of the delusional state of CDC leadership right now, it's worth exploring independent projections of the Ebola outbreak that has already begun. Below, I offer my own best estimates on what we're likely to face from Ebola in the years ahead. All such projections are, of course, subject to change if circumstances change or if new advances are made in the prevention or treatment of Ebola.

Duration of preparedness supplies

Based on what we've learned over just the last few days, I am updating my recommendations for isolation self-reliance storage supplies to a minimum of 42 days (six weeks). This means that all the supplies you need for day-to-day consumption must be gathered in sufficient quantities to ride out a six-week mandatory quarantine in your own home.

Naturally, 42 days is a bare minimum and you would be far smarter to cover yourself and your family members for a period of 90 days, 180 days or even longer.

These supplies should include food, water, medicine, emergency power needs, heating and cooling, pet food supplies and so on. Water is often the most challenging for families because of the enormous quantities needed. I like to recommend 4 gallons per person per day, but in a pinch you could survive on half that. This means that a family of four needs, at bare minimum, about 250 gallons of water per month (and that barely covers basic hygiene and cooking needs). So a six-week supply of minimum water needs is roughly 375 gallons, or about 7 of those large 55-gallon barrels full of water.

If you're lucky, the public water supply might still function during a serious outbreak, in which case you can get by with a high-quality water filter. Based on my recent laboratory testing, the gravity water filter that removes the most toxic elements is the Big Berkey with both the ceramic elements on top and the arsenic / fluoride elements attached below. In this configuration the Berkey filters also remove significant quantities of uranium, strontium, aluminum and other elements (I'll be sharing actual ICP-MS laboratory results soon).

When planning for supplies, don't forget all the pandemic medical supplies you'll need: bleach, full body isolation suits, full face respirators, latex gloves, plastic sheeting, duct tape and so on.

Chance of CDC and western medicine halting Ebola in the USA

I currently estimate a 1 in 4 chance of the CDC and U.S. health authorities successfully preventing any "serious" Ebola outbreaks in America. By "serious," I mean a ten or more people infected in a single region.

This means I currently believe there is a 75% chance that we will see an outbreak involving at least 10 people in the United States sometime within the next 24 months.

I do believe, however, that the current Dallas outbreak will be controlled. Perhaps I'm being overly optimistic in that, considering all the hundreds of people who have potentially been exposed via air travel, and I'll watch closely over the next 42 days to see how many additional infections (if any) might have taken place.

Of course, there's always a possibility that infections have already spread to more than 10 people from the Dallas outbreak, but we won't even know for six more weeks. That's because we now know the incubation period for Ebola is really 42 days, not the 21 days we've all been told by the CDC.

In other words, every time there is a new infection identified, the clocks starts ticking on a 42-day countdown. If no new infections are reported during that 42-day countdown, then we can be confident the virus did not spread.

It is worth noting that James Wesley Rawles, former U.S. Army intelligence officer and founder of www.SurvivalBlog.com also predicts the CDC will be unable to stop Ebola from sooner or later spreading across America. Like me, Rawles believes the most substantial long-term threat comes from the likely spread of Ebola in Central or South America from which it would then rapidly spread to North America via uncontrolled border crossings.

I continue to believe this is the most likely scenario that would overwhelm the U.S. medical system and lead to the uncontrolled spread of Ebola across U.S. cities.

Timing of serious outbreaks across the United States

If you review the spread of Ebola in Liberia and Sierra Leone, you realize it took less than one year for Ebola to go from a handful of people to infecting over 10,000 per month.

With this strain of Ebola, which may have been weaponized, the time required to go from a very small number of infections to over one million infections, according to CDC computer modeling, is barely over a year (13 - 15 months).

Of course, we were repeatedly told that the USA has "first world hospitals" and advanced medical technology, so Ebola can't spread in the USA. But it did spread in precisely the way we were told it wouldn't: among medical staff working in a "first world hospital" in Dallas.

Now we're told, "America is not Liberia," implying that Ebola somehow won't infect people from rich nations. But it's an idiotic statement. Ebola doesn't care about your economic status or nationality, and it can't tell the difference between a Liberian and an American. Bluntly stated, Ebola doesn't check your passport before deciding to infect you.

In many ways, in fact, America is MORE vulnerable to Ebola than Liberia:

• America has a higher population density

• Americans travel more frequently than Liberians, creating more opportunities to spread a pandemic

• Americans are more immunosuppressed from mass medications

• Americans are more psychology invested in a state of denial, believing that Ebola can't possibly infect them because that's what the American government keeps telling them

12 - 24 months

For these reasons, I think a serious, uncontrolled outbreak of Ebola in America would emerge 12 - 24 months following a serious uncontrolled outbreak of Ebola in any Central or South American nation (such as El Salvador or even Mexico). On the positive side, however, if Ebola can be prevented from taking hold in Mexico or any countries to the south, there is a very strong chance it can be substantially kept out of the continental United States.

If Ebola spreads uncontrolled across the United States and isn't halted with some extraordinary intervention (medical or otherwise), I estimate the number of fatalities could reach 30 million in a worst-case scenario, which would take several years to unfold and "burn out." That's roughly 10% of the U.S. population, and I must emphasize this is a worst-case scenario, not the most likely scenario.

I also realize that some will argue that this number is not nearly high enough for a worst-case scenario. If Ebola has a 50% - 70% fatality rate, they would argue, then an uncontrolled infection across the United States should produce 150+ million fatalities. But that assumes a 100% infection rate and also that the virus maintains its high fatality rate. Usually when viruses mutate to become more successful at spreading, they become less likely to kill their hosts. So we are likely to see a fatality rate significantly lower than 50% if this virus is given more opportunities to spread and mutate.

My "worst case" estimate of 30 million people comes from the formula of a 20% fatality rate with the infection of 150 million people over a period of several years.

What I'm doing to help save lives and prevent the pandemic

I hope and pray that nothing like this ever comes to pass, and I'm working very diligently every day to try to educate the public and help save lives through my free online audio course at www.BioDefense.com

Since there's not much I can do on the front lines with hospitals and patients -- that's the CDC's domain -- I am contributing to the safety of society in the best way I know how: by teaching people principles of Pandemic Preparedness so that lives will be saved if the CDC fails to contain this.

Stay informed! Keep watching these websites for more independent news you won't find from mainstream corporate sources:

www.SHTFplan.com
www.SurvivalBlog.com
www.SteveQuayle.com
www.BioDefense.com
www.TheCommonsenseShow.com