Could the Ebola Virus Reach The UK?

This year one of the biggest stories in heath news and in fact world news is the outbreak of the Ebola virus. Notably, this outbreak has seen the biggest surge in infections and fatalities in human history. The Ebola virus is known to cause the most unpleasant of symptoms, from vomiting and fatigue to bleeds from the eyes and nose ('internal and external bleeding'). As of 27th July 2014, the virus has claimed the lives of 660 people in areas with weak healthcare systems such as Sierra Leone and Liberia. The high mortality rate of around 90% shows how potent the virus really is. Even healthcare staff clothed in complete overalls have been known to be infected. Currently there is no cure for the disease - the only appropriate action for healthcare services is to isolate the infected and transfer them into intensive care.

The UK foreign secretary Philip Hammond has described to the BBC that this outbreak is a "threat" to the UK. Very urban areas in sub-sahrhan African countries have been the most affected, so perhaps the virus could strike an impact in the UK or other Western countries with built-up areas.

The virus is able to be transmitted through bodily fluids and faecal matter, it means the virus can be contained more easily than airborne diseases in areas where people are in close proximity of each other. One of the most discussed environments for the virus to be transmitted in passenger planes. Commercial flights will only carry a few toilet facilities for passengers to use. It follows that there is a risk many people could become infected through use of one toilet facility.

Recently, it was reported that one man from Liberia who showed signs of the Ebola virus was permitted to board a plane to Nigeria. Nigeria hadn't reported any cases of the virus up until the man arrived in Nigeria and died shortly after in a isolation ward due to infection. It is even confirmed he vomited whilst on the plane, and despite having 'high fever', he boarded the flight.

So how is this outbreak being 'controlled'? As mentioned, the infected will need have an accurate diagnosis followed by isolation in hospital. This is primarily to reduce the chances of the virus claiming another host. Appropriate sanitation will also need to be ensured to minimise the exposure of bodily fluids or faecal matter to the environment.

In my view, an outbreak in the UK will be able to be controlled more effectively than in less equipped areas in Africa. Also higher standards of sanitation and healthcare would mean reduced risks of transmission between individuals.


Credit to Adam Withnall and Tomas Jivanda who write for The Independent. Links to articles in The Independent:

Published 26th July 

Published 27th July

Published 30th July

New Assisted Dying Bill in Review

One of the latest news stores this week is the review of the assisted dying bill, which if passed will give permission for doctors to administer doses of powerful drugs to end the lives of those whose quality of life is seriously compromised. Essentially euthanasia, this will allow people who are seriously terminally ill to consider whether they would want to sustain their lives any longer. For me, this is a topic in which people should approach with caution as it is real lives, real people, real stories that we are dealing with.

On a basic level (although I respect this isn't a simple topic at all) we are evaluating the quality of a persons life against the longevity or quantity of their life. Indeed it leaves the nation divided in opinion. Speaking to The Independent, oncologist Professor Karol Sikora  believes that the implementation of this power for doctors will result in "death squads" of doctors.

What is important to note is that assisted dying will be of significant relevance to the terminally ill who have been told the have 'less than six months to live'. If this bill is passed, it will mean doctors will have a further big responsibility, more vitally important choices to make.

Doctors in my opinion may only make up a fraction of this matter. In medicine, the patient is the paramount figure of every case - ultimately it is their choice whether to end their own lives or not. I believe they should have the choice, providing they are sane and in "the right frame of mind". No doubt, their families will have a part to play in every patient's decision.

However British Prime Minister David Cameron is concerned that if passed, the bill may cause people to be "pushed into things that they don't actually want for themselves."

Some may argue that assisted dying will help to suppress the needless suffering of the terminally ill - this could have an effect on families as well will lessened responsibility and emotional suffering perhaps.

What do people think? Well according to a 'poll for ITV this week, 70% of Britons are behind the assisted dying bill, with 10% disagreeing'.

In my view, I believe that the bill should be passed. The attention must be brought to the patients themselves. It is they who endure terrible suffering, it is they who should be given a choice.

Credit to Natasha Culzac, reporter for The Independent for the original article. Click here for more on the story.