Should You Worry about the Ebola Outbreak?

Everyday Einstein explains what exactly Ebola is, and breaks down some of the misinformation being spread by news outlets

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Scientific American presents Everyday Einstein by Quick & Dirty Tips. Scientific American and Quick & Dirty Tips are both Macmillan companies.

By now, you’re probably either sick of hearing about Ebola, or terrified to leave your house. While it's true that Ebola is a pretty horrible disease, you might be surprised to know just how much misinformation there is out in the media about the current outbreak.

Airborne vs Airborne
One of the big areas of confusion is whether or not Ebola can be spread by “airborne transmission." One reason for this confusion is that not everyone means the same thing when they say “airborne transmission."


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


To many epidemiologists (people that study diseases and how they spread), "airborne transmission" means that a pathogen can survive for long periods of time in the air. For example, the flu virus can float around in the air for two days or longer. If you have the flu, and go sneeze in the closet, and then your friend goes into that closet the next day, there's a chance he could get the flu.

In contrast, some people refer to "airborne transmission" as meaning, "you can get sick if a sick person sneezes on you directly.”

Many media websites are spreading the report that some people are suspicious that Ebola could be spread by airborne transmission--but which kind of airborne are they talking about, and is it true?

If you read the "Ebola and airborne transmission" studies that are mentioned in the news (which I’m willing to bet most news writers haven’t), nearly every study cited that discusses the possibility of airborne transmission points to a study done in 1995 on some monkeys.

In that study, there were some monkeys that had Ebola sitting in cages on one side of the room, and some monkeys that didn’t have Ebola sitting in cages on the other side of the room. At a certain point, the scientists noticed that two of the Ebola-free monkeys had somehow caught Ebola.

Before you go out and buy a gas mask, though, pay attention to the discussion section of the paper, in which the scientists state that the monkeys were most likely infected by eating the "secretions or excretions" of the infected monkeys, or rubbing it into their eyes. Nowhere do they state that this infection occured by simply breathing the same air as the sick monkeys.
 

>> Continue reading on QuickAndDirtyTips.com

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe