Frightening brush with Ebola--A scientist pricks her finger with a contaminated needle

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


A German researcher who accidentally exposed herself to the dreaded Ebola virus is apparently in the clear: the virus's three-week incubation period expired yesterday, her supervisor tells ScientificAmerican.com.

On March 12, a 45-year-old virologist (whose name was not released) at the Bernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine in Hamburg, Germany, accidentally jabbed herself with a syringe containing the virus that causes Ebola hemorrhagic fever, which kills up to 90 percent of its victims. It's symptoms: fever, body aches, diarrhea, vomiting, red eyes, and internal and external bleeding.

The slip occurred while the researcher, who had been studying new tests for Ebola infection, was injecting mice with the virus, according Stephan Günther, head of the institute's virology department. After reporting the incident to the institute, the woman rushed to the hospital, where she was placed in an isolated room and visited by doctors and nurses wearing protective gowns, gloves and masks.

That evening, Günther and his colleagues got on the phone with scientists from the U.S. and Canada, and together they decided to offer the woman an experimental Ebola vaccine that had never been tried in humans but which had shown promising results in monkeys -- even after they had been infected, Günther explains. Within 48 hours of the initial needle prick, researchers at Winnipeg's National Microbiology Lab in Canada had shipped the vaccine to Germany and it had been given to the woman.

About 14 hours later, she came down with a fever.

"At that moment, when she developed the fever, it wasn't clear if it was due to the Ebola virus," or to the vaccine, Günther says. But now that the virus' three-week incubation period has passed and no other Ebola symptoms have surfaced, Günther believes the vaccine—not the Ebola virus—was responsible.

"We are very confident the game is over," he says, noting that the woman was released from the hospital yesterday and is physically and psychologically stable. But how the woman evaded the disease remains a mystery – either she never became infected in the first place or the vaccine worked, Günther says. The good news, he says, "[is that] there were no serious side effects associated with the vaccine."

This is not the first time researchers have accidentally pricked themselves with needles containing the deadly Ebola virus. In 2004 a scientist from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Frederick, Md., poked himself when a kicking mouse caused his hand to slip. Fortunately, he never developed the disease.

Image of Ebola virions: Public Library of Science via Wikimedia Commons

 


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.


 

 

 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe