Ebola, the hemorrhagic fever is closer than you think, but there is no reason to panic…yet!
By Jesica Levingston Mac leod, PhD
In case you did not hear about it, the Center of Disease Control (CDC) reported an outbreak of a “more virulent” Ebola virus infections in Guinea, spreading now to Sierra Leone . Ebola virus is the etiological agent of severe hemorrhagic fever. The symptoms? Fever, rash, severe abdominal pain, vomiting, and bleeding, both internally and externally. The fatality rate? Around 90%. Even worse, these outbreaks are occurring with increasing frequency. Some explanations for this are the increased contact between humans and the natural reservoir of the viruses (fruit bats), and fluctuations in viral load and prevalence in this reservoir. The transmission of the virus mostly occurs by contact with infected blood, secretions or organs of either bats, nonhuman primates or humans. This is why you should not eat bats or monkeys if you visit any of the affected areas, or hang around any cemeteries. Not surprisingly, Ebola was named as the most frightening disease in the world. It was documented for the first time in 1976 in the Republic of Congo; one of the sources came from the Ebola River.
In 2012 an outbreak in Uganda found us in a similar medical emptiness: the research of two of the vaccines that were “apparently” going great had been canceled by the department of defense, due to funding constraints. Therefore, so far we do not have any vaccine or effective treatment available.
Albeit a DNA based vaccine was described in 2003 to fully protected macaques against the fatal virus, it did not continue to further clinical trials. It was not until 10 years later that a group in the US National Institutes of Health published research about a vaccine consisting of a recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus expressing the ebola glycoprotein which protects macaques from Ebola virus infections, although this method is not licensed for human use.
But, why does the US department of defense care about an African virus? The answer is pretty obvious: it can be used as a bio hazard weapon. On the other hand, no leading pharmaceutical is going to invest in a “very expensive and time consuming” vaccine development to be used in countries that can not afford even a basic level of health care. Some compounds are showing a promising antiviral effect in vitro and/or an inhibition of a variety of viral proteins activities. Sadly, all of them are in an early stage of drug development.