Some Ebola Patients Never Show a Fever
We’ve repeatedly pointed out that testing for temperature is NOT a bullet-proof way to screen for Ebola.
The Los Angeles Times reported last week:
The largest study of the current outbreak found that in nearly 13% of “confirmed and probable” cases in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea and elsewhere, those infected did not have fevers.
The study, sponsored by the World Health Organization and published online late last month by the New England Journal of Medicine, analyzed data on 3,343 confirmed and 667 probable cases of Ebola.
U.S. health officials have repeatedly emphasized that fever is a reliable sign of infectiousness. As a defense against the spread of the virus to this country, the Obama administration has ordered that passengers arriving from West Africa at five U.S. airports be checked for fever.
Referring to those who had close contact with Duncan, [CDC director] Frieden said a week ago: “The only thing we need to ensure is that their temperature is monitored, and if they develop a fever, that they are immediately assessed, isolated and if found to be positive, then appropriately cared for.”
Dr. Anthony Fauci, who is helping to shape the U.S. response to Ebola as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was asked by a CNN interviewer on Oct. 4 whether a person could be “contagious without having a fever.”
Fauci replied that “the answer to that is no.”
So far, the CDC and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease have been wrong about virtually everything concerning this Ebola outbreak.