Millions More at Risk in Ebola Outbreak, British Study Finds

Oliver Duggan, Telegraph (London), September 10, 2014

The deadliest Ebola outbreak in history could spread to a further 15 countries in West and Central Africa, putting up to 70 million people at risk of infection, a ground-breaking study has found.

Research by the University of Oxford compared historic outbreaks to the virus’ possible transmission in bats and chimpanzees to predict how the disease could spread through its vast animal reservoir.

It is the first time scientists have attempted to explain how the virus, which is contracted through contact with infected bodily fluids, has travelled westward across Africa.

The resulting map shows how the populations of the Central African Republic, Cameroon, Ghana and a dozen more countries could be hit by the outbreak, which has already killed nearly 2,300 people in 2014.


Click for an enlarged version.

Several species of bat are suspected of carrying the virus through the jungles of West and Central Africa without showing symptoms, passing the disease onto other animals which are eaten by some communities as “bush meat”.

Researchers said transmission to the human population was not “inevitable”, but that environmental factors in many more countries than previously considered made it possible for further Ebola outbreak outbreaks.

According to the Oxford study, Cote D’Ivoire, Gabon, Angola, Tanzania, Togo, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Burundi, Equatorial Guinea, Madagascar and Malawi could also join those countries already affected.

More than 1,000 people have so far died in Liberia, where the country’s Defence Minister Brownie Samukai has said the disease threatens the country’s very existence.

“Liberia is facing a serious threat to its national existence. The deadly Ebola virus has caused a disruption of the normal functioning of our State,” he said yesterday.

Further deaths have been reported in Sierra Leone, Nigeria and Guinea and one case has recently been confirmed Senegal.

The Oxford study’s author Nick Golding, a researcher at the University’s Department of Zoology, said: “Our map shows the likely ‘reservoir’ of Ebola virus in animal populations, and this is larger than has been previously appreciated.

“This does not mean that transmission to humans is inevitable in these areas; only that all the environmental and epidemiological conditions suitable for an outbreak occur there.”

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Republic of Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo…I’m confused.

    Didn’t one of them use to be Zaire?

    • Olorin

      Google the term

      “the onion” “our dumb world” congo

    • One of the did, but I just don’t car which.

  • Whitetrashgang


  • RealisticGuy

    It doesn’t matter to me one way or another. As long as they stay put. I don’t have anything against Africans in Africa.

    Unfortunately, our progressive crazies would use such a die off as an excuse to send Africa more of our wealth (keeping a tidy profit for themselves of course), or to bring more Africans to our countries.

    Ultimately, our problem isn’t the blacks, or the browns, it’s ethnic European liberals. We could easily fix the black’s attitude, and push the browns back over the border in the US, and out of Europe, if it weren’t for our liberals. They are the cancer.

  • HJ11

    Nature works to cull the population. Let it do so in Africa. Whites should not interfere with nature in Africa. To save those that nature is killing off is to keep them alive so they can breed more like themselves and eventually destroy Whites either directly through violence or through bedroom genocide.

    Let them pass from the scene. They are an earlier model human and they belong on the junk heap as we Whites are the newest model and their replacement.

    • Neue Sachlichkeit

      Whites, or anyone else for that matter, should not IMO interfere with nature ANYWHERE.

      And “bedroom genocide” is new to me, evocative, and horrifying. Thank you for the ammunition.

    • Guesto

      If they indeed are an earlier human subspecies, then indeed we have an obligation to prevent their extinction, just as with any other animal species. Their genetic diversity can be utilized to facilitate our eventual genetic engineering endeavors – it’s a treasure trove of millennia of evolution.

      • HJ11

        Nonsense. We have no such obligation. Our obligation is only to our kind.

  • Nancy

    Do you think they’re still lowballing the numbers, perhaps? (One can dream, right?)

  • dd121

    I don’t think Ebola is a big threat in the West where we have good sanitation. Just why does Obama think this is a matter of USA national interest? Maybe he’s having a flair-up of “my people” syndrome.

  • scutum


  • HJ11

    Oh please! My kind is this: Non-Jewish Whites of European descent. Period. A finer point need not be put on it for this discussion.

    However, I might also define my kind this way: A non-Jewish White person of European descent who has two White parents who had two White parents and whose parents and grandparents provided 46 “White” chromosomes.