Forget Ebola-what about the flu?

[Patrick O'Neil]

On 15 Feb 1995, Steve Quan wrote:

> But, the little I've read implies that Ebola is not airborne(except for 
> the type that took out the monkeys -and only the monkeys- in The Hot 
> Zone).  So, as horrible and deadly as it is, doesn't that make it more 
> difficult to "catch?"  I was wondering if it isn't more likely that the 
> next big threat would be more flu-like.  Isn't that a virus that mutates 
> every year?  Given enough time couldn't it mutate into something 
> really new? 

Ebola Zaire can spread by airborne transmission though not all that 
efficiently.  As for the flu, it has already (in recent history) been a 
real nasty killer.  The flu pandemic of 1918 killed over 20 million 
people worldwide.  Americans brought it into Europe along with troops in 
WWI.  The US was already experiencing a pretty tough flu year, but it 
wasn't terribly fatal.  When the troops got into the trenches of Europe, 
however, the situation greatly favored the evolution of a very virulent 
strain.  With soldiers packed so densely in trenches, when one soldier 
got sick, he quickly and easily passed it on to his fellow soldiers in 
the area - even when it began to develop into a powerful virus and 
soldiers were essentially laid up in the trenches, it didn't matter, they 
still were able to efficiently transmit the virus.  When soldiers were 
sent to field hospitals, this further favored the spread and enhanced 
virulence.  The hospitals and ambulances were often packed so that 
everyone was exposed to the virus.  This situation fed on itself leading 
to a real killer flu variant.  
  So...given the proper circumstances, the flu can develop into a major 
killer, but then, so could practically any virus.

For more (and better) information, you might read the book: " Evolution of
Infectious Disease" by Paul W. Ewald

Patrick O'Neil