Zika virus

[FIRE me]

Seems like no one in the medical field is willing to put a number on the odds of the Zika virus causing microcephaly in a pregnancy.

It looks to me like it may be less than 1%, maybe around 0.1%. I had to guess what percentage of the pregnant women were actually exposed to the virus. I used the fertility rate of Brazil reported by the CIA World Factbook, coupled with media reports of the number of babies born in Brazil with microcephaly.

Anyone else have a different number?

[Bracken_Joy]

Following, because I have been curious about this.

I have yet to see anyone reputable actually assert a causal link.

Edit to add: everything is couched as correlation, not causation, which is what I mean to say.

[Larabeth]

I feel like Zika is purposefully being used like Ebola in the US... just a way for the news stations to keep their ratings up.

http://time.com/4209537/zika-birth-defects/
Though if Time is to be believed, the CDC is in the process of formulating controls for studies to make some definitive conclusions.

[MandalayVA]

I feel like Zika is purposefully being used like Ebola in the US ... just a way for the news stations to keep their ratings up.

^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS

[GrowingTheGreen]

I feel like Zika is purposefully being used like Ebola in the US ... just a way for the news stations to keep their ratings up.

^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS

Yup. Fear sells.

[I'm a red panda]

It certainly does seem strange that these birth defects haven't been seen in other countries with Zika. 
I would suspect something else is going on in Brazil. But if I were pregnant, I wouldn't travel to a country with a high infection risk; because it is just too much of an unknown. I feel very sorry for anyone there trying to have a family, it must be terrifying just not knowing (not to mention something is causing this!)

My MIL however doesn't even want us coming to Texas (they have ONE non-locally transmitted case in her county). That's ridiculous. It's not that difficult to avoid mosquito born illnesses in the USA, since most people spend most of their time in air conditioned buildings.

[gaja]

I believe in preparing for the worst, and think the doctors are doing the right thing in warning pregnant people in case there might be a link.

But of course, there are a few other things in Brazil that have caused consern, e.g. the gigantic chemical spill that has ruined the drinking water of 250 000 people http://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-damburst-environment-idUSKCN0T40PY20151115

Or all the olymic athletes that are getting sick from the water in Rio: http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/dec/07/rio-2016-olympic-games-ioc-meeting

What else about the pollution in Brazil do we not know?

[Gin1984]

It is something certain MDs noticed as a possibility.  There does need to be a lot more research into it, but because it seemed benign no one has done that research.  There was no funding for such research.  Now they might be able to answer your questions in 5-10 years, if we give researchers the funding.

[RosieTR]

It certainly does seem strange that these birth defects haven't been seen in other countries with Zika. 
I would suspect something else is going on in Brazil. But if I were pregnant, I wouldn't travel to a country with a high infection risk; because it is just too much of an unknown. I feel very sorry for anyone there trying to have a family, it must be terrifying just not knowing (not to mention something is causing this!)

My MIL however doesn't even want us coming to Texas (they have ONE non-locally transmitted case in her county). That's ridiculous. It's not that difficult to avoid mosquito born illnesses in the USA, since most people spend most of their time in air conditioned buildings.

When they went back to look at previous, small outbreaks of Zika in some Pacific islands, they did find an uptick in birth defects. At the time, the connection wasn't made because it was not clear if it was just a freak uptick with other causes. For example, if there were an island with 10,000 people on it, and normal rate of this birth defect was even as high as 1%, it would still be tough to say if 5 cases of a birth defect in a year was just random (esp since microcephaly can be caused by other things).

It's also very difficult to prove causation, without purposely infecting a population, which is why the CDC and others have not said for certain. However, there is mounting evidence that the huge uptick in microcephaly is caused by Zika. There's also evidence that it can be passed via sexual intercourse.

All that said, Zika is an order of magnitude less concerning than Ebola, though far more transmissible. If Ebola ever airborne (which would be an evolutionary feat, although not totally impossible) we'd be fucked. The number one worry among epidemiologists is probably plain old iinfluenza. Super-prone to mutating, passes easily between species (especially birds), some strains are *highly* virulent and it's super-transmissible. Increasing poultry markets, climate change, political issues all have the potential to really spur on prime conditions, but it's still generally a law of odds. If it mutates enough times, one of those will be deadly to humans (as we have seen a few times in history). We only have more people, and more connection with those people, than we did in 1917, for example.

[I'm a red panda]

When they went back to look at previous, small outbreaks of Zika in some Pacific islands, they did find an uptick in birth defects.

I hadn't heard that. Of course, anytime you go looking you are also bound to find more- because many things go unreported or undiagnosed. I feel so badly for these families.

There's also evidence that it can be passed via sexual intercourse.

I think they are nearly certain that Zika is sexually transmitted. They haven't seen evidence of mosquito-based transmission in the US, but have seen sexual transmission.

[justajane]

I think you can simultaneously conclude that the Zika virus is being sensationalized by the media, while also recognizing that it is a concerning correlation that deserves caution and further research.

If I were pregnant or wanted to be, it would certainly give me pause. The stakes are just so high if they actually do find causation that I would avoid areas in which it is prevalent.

What terrifies me about this as a woman is that, unlike other risks like Listeria, toxoplasmosis (which also causes microcephaly), and other risks, this one is not as easily mitigated. You can abstain from soft cheeses in your local bodega, but aside from never going outside or opening your windows, how can you avoid Zika?

And I don't understand how they can absolutely rule out the virus migrating up here. Yes, it's tropical, but so was West Nile originally. Yet, every summer a couple of dozen people get it in the Midwest. Probably more. Those are only the ones who are tested and confirmed.

[I'm a red panda]

And I don't understand how they can absolutely rule out the virus migrating up here.

Have they?  I thought it was clearly stated that the US would have local Zika transmission. 

I think maybe it is only a specific breed of mosquito, so perhaps that mosquito is only in the southern US?

But really, I suspect transmission in US will be less than more tropical countries because of central air conditioning, mosquito control programs, as well as harsh winters that will make it need to "reset" annually.  Just like how West Nile hasn't been that devastating, though you still don't want to get it.

but aside from never going outside or opening your windows, how can you avoid Zika?

For many people in the US, that isn't too difficult. I'm hoping to be pregnant this summer- if Zika has spread up here, I'll give up campfires and BBQs; wear long sleeves outdoors and stay inside as much as possible.  It's only a few months of mosquito season really.  It's people in countries where that isn't an option that this must be truly terrifying. 

[Penny Lane]

There is a certain type of mosquito that is the vector.  These can occur in the south.  Go to the CDC.gov site for what is known about incubation etc-- it's not much yet, but this will be elucidated.  The doctor who put together the microcephaly association-- not cause yet-- is a pediatric neurologist in Brazil.  it is possible that no one elsewhere has noted this, but you can bet this will be studied.  There may be a factor X that is required for this defect in addition to the virus, for instance.

[justajane]

And I don't understand how they can absolutely rule out the virus migrating up here.

Have they?  I thought it was clearly stated that the US would have local Zika transmission. 

I guess. I was going off of a conversation I had with a friend of mine who is a pediatrician in my city. If a Zika microcephaly case occurred here, he is one of the likely doctors to treat it, since he specializes in neonatal care at a children's hospital. And he seemed unconcerned locally. I presumed he was prompted on this by some information he received at his job. He comment to me was, "We don't need to worry. It's a tropical mosquito." But maybe that was just his own perception gleaned from the media. I imagine it is on the CDC's radar.

I am having a hard time with the CDC at the moment, in light of their pretty outrageous pronouncement a week or so ago that all women of childbearing age not currently on birth control should abstain from any alcohol. You know, just in case.   

Edited to add I am in the lower Midwest. We get a lot of West Nile.

[MandalayVA]

I am having a hard time with the CDC at the moment, in light of their pretty outrageous pronouncement a week or so ago that all women of childbearing age not currently on birth control should abstain from any alcohol. You know, just in case.   

Edited to add I am in the lower Midwest. We get a lot of West Nile.

A few years ago everyone was flipping out because the FDA suggested that all women of childbearing age should be taking folic acid--lots of wailing on Jezebel and the like.  Just like this it was a SUGGESTION, not a law.

[I'm a red panda]

A few years ago everyone was flipping out because the FDA suggested that all women of childbearing age should be taking folic acid--lots of wailing on Jezebel and the like.  Just like this it was a SUGGESTION, not a law.

But taking folic acid isn't something that puts undue hardship onto women.  Now, I don't drink alcohol at all, so it's not big deal; but for most people, giving up ALL alcohol would be a significant change to their life. Telling every woman of childbearing age who is not on birth control they should be drinking NO alcohol during any part of their cycle is just unrealistic. It's not helpful and it places unnecessary stress on women who do find themselves unexpectedly pregnant.

I also am confused how our research varies so drastically from other countries where women can be either allowed, or even encouraged, to drink in small quantities during pregnancy. 

[justajane]

I am having a hard time with the CDC at the moment, in light of their pretty outrageous pronouncement a week or so ago that all women of childbearing age not currently on birth control should abstain from any alcohol. You know, just in case.   

Edited to add I am in the lower Midwest. We get a lot of West Nile.

A few years ago everyone was flipping out because the FDA suggested that all women of childbearing age should be taking folic acid--lots of wailing on Jezebel and the like.  Just like this it was a SUGGESTION, not a law.

Sorry to derail the thread, but I really disagree with you here. Yeah, it's not a law, but most of the socially prescriptive things people face are not laws. But that doesn't mean that there isn't such a thing as powerful compulsion from governmental or non-governmental bodies in relative authority.

I think the problem here is with treating women primarily as incubators and treating pregnancy as an inevitability. What is more, we assume that women are going to be irresponsible in their alcoholic intake. A beer with dinner, even if you aren't on birth control, is not going to hurt the baby you might conceive later that week.

I personally hate campaigns like the one below from the Nova Scotia Liquor Corporation. And, yeah, like iowajes, I've lived in cultures where pregnant women do imbibe responsibly. Not surprisingly, their babies are fine.

[Gin1984]

A few years ago everyone was flipping out because the FDA suggested that all women of childbearing age should be taking folic acid--lots of wailing on Jezebel and the like.  Just like this it was a SUGGESTION, not a law.

But taking folic acid isn't something that puts undue hardship onto women.  Now, I don't drink alcohol at all, so it's not big deal; but for most people, giving up ALL alcohol would be a significant change to their life. Telling every woman of childbearing age who is not on birth control they should be drinking NO alcohol during any part of their cycle is just unrealistic. It's not helpful and it places unnecessary stress on women who do find themselves unexpectedly pregnant.

I also am confused how our research varies so drastically from other countries where women can be either allowed, or even encouraged, to drink in small quantities during pregnancy.

Our research does not vary from other countries at all.  It is well established that moderate drinking (one drink per week) has no harm on the fetus and in some research studies it shows a benefit. However, the medical establishment does not believe women will follow the recommendations and therefore say no alcohol.  There is absolutely no data to suggest (ours or otherwise) than less than heavy drinking (3 drinks/day or one drink every of the week) can cause FAS.  Therefore the CDC is stating this based on a biased opinion of women and their decision abilities, not actual experimental based medicine.  THAT is why so many women are pissed. 
Then you have the cases where women have been charged with child endangerment for doing something not illegal and not proved to be harmful, because they are pregnant.  For the CDC to say that, given the current state of affairs, it has implications beyond a simple recommendation.   

[justajane]

Yeah, Gin1984, I've heard that many OBs basically say no alcohol because they fear that, if they say women can have one glass of wine a week, that their pregnant patients will interpret one glass as 10 oz. rather than 5 oz. So instead, most recommend none at all. This, IMO, takes a dim view of women.

I would much rather have a public health campaign that educates women about what a glass of wine actually looks like (kind of like how the piece of meat on your plate should resemble a deck of cards) rather than insulting our intelligence and saying, "Nope, no alcohol for you," even though the science says it is okay in certain quantities. 

Back to the Zika virus, are women of childbearing age in Brazil now "recommended" to stay inside from sunset to sunrise?

[I'm a red panda]

This, IMO, takes a dim view of women.

I agree but I think that coming from an OB (rather than the government) to a pregnant woman (rather than any woman who has a uterus) makes a huge difference in how offended I am by it.

Back to the Zika virus, are women of childbearing age in Brazil now "recommended" to stay inside from sunset to sunrise?

At least one of the countries in South America (Colombia?) has told women to not get pregnant.  And given them no resources to help do such a thing.

[Dee18]

The aegypti mosquito is often found inside homes and bites during the day, not just in the evening.   It is in the southeastern U.S., and southern states that border Mexico, as well as in California.  All of this is on the CDC website.  Historically it has also been found much farther north, during yellow fever outbreaks.

[GuitarStv]

To play a little devil's advocate here . . . Should we even be looking for a cure?  Is this secretly a blessing in disguise?

We know that given free choice, people will only stop pumping out babies when their standard of living is already high enough to do massive environmental damage with fewer offspring.  So . . . now we have a virus that doesn't really do anything too bad to people who are infected with it, but makes it harder for them to reproduce.

It seems like a much gentler way to curb our population than the other likely natural way . . . a fullblown incurable pandemic that causes tremendous suffering and eventual death.

[former player]

To play a little devil's advocate here . . . Should we even be looking for a cure?  Is this secretly a blessing in disguise?

We know that given free choice, people will only stop pumping out babies when their standard of living is already high enough to do massive environmental damage with fewer offspring.  So . . . now we have a virus that doesn't really do anything too bad to people who are infected with it, but makes it harder for them to reproduce.

It seems like a much gentler way to curb our population than the other likely natural way . . . a fullblown incurable pandemic that causes tremendous suffering and eventual death.

No.  Just, no.

Deformed babies as an acceptable means of controlling fertility?  No.

Choice?  What choice if you live in a slum with no health care?  With no protection against violent and predatory men?

If you are so worried about population control, do something positive (donate, volunteer) rather than advocating devastating diseases in poor people of colour.

[justajane]

To play a little devil's advocate here . . . Should we even be looking for a cure?  Is this secretly a blessing in disguise?

We know that given free choice, people will only stop pumping out babies when their standard of living is already high enough to do massive environmental damage with fewer offspring.  So . . . now we have a virus that doesn't really do anything too bad to people who are infected with it, but makes it harder for them to reproduce.

It seems like a much gentler way to curb our population than the other likely natural way . . . a fullblown incurable pandemic that causes tremendous suffering and eventual death.

No.  Just, no.

Deformed babies as an acceptable means of controlling fertility?  No.

Choice?  What choice if you live in a slum with no health care?  With no protection against violent and predatory men?

If you are so worried about population control, do something positive (donate, volunteer) rather than advocating devastating diseases in poor people of colour.

Yes, GuitarStv's post doesn't do any favors for the overpopulation philosophy and those who advocate it.

This is a problem with a human face and a tragic reality. I have a hard time looking at the pictures of those poor babies in Brazil who suffer from this and their helpless parents who lack the financial resources to deal with the hand they have been dealt. Sure, you can argue that I'm only seeing those photos because of sensationalized media coverage, but it doesn't diminish the fact that this is a real tragedy for those who are living it.

[I'm a red panda]

So . . . now we have a virus that doesn't really do anything too bad to people who are infected with it, but makes it harder for them to reproduce.

This post disgusts me. I can only imagine you have never conceived a child with severe anamolies. It is absolutely heartbreaking. And most of the time something completely out of control of the parents.
 
But I wanted to mention something.  This virus DOESN'T make it harder for people to reproduce. It only increases the chance that their off-spring will be born with severe disabilities. 

So those children may have a harder time reproducing; but they also get to lead a life of suffering in the meantime.

How about encouraging countries to educate their population on birth control and family planning, and having the government work to decrease sexual assualt and abuse.  Rather than just saying that deformed babies won't reproduce in the next generation so this is good population control.

[Gin1984]

So . . . now we have a virus that doesn't really do anything too bad to people who are infected with it, but makes it harder for them to reproduce.

This post disgusts me. I can only imagine you have never conceived a child with severe anamolies. It is absolutely heartbreaking. And most of the time something completely out of control of the parents.
 
But I wanted to mention something.  This virus DOESN'T make it harder for people to reproduce. It only increases the chance that their off-spring will be born with severe disabilities. 

So those children may have a harder time reproducing; but they also get to lead a life of suffering in the meantime.

How about encouraging countries to educate their population on birth control and family planning, and having the government work to decrease sexual assualt and abuse.  Rather than just saying that deformed babies won't reproduce in the next generation so this is good population control.

Just a side point often with this deformity it is a short life.

[snacky]

So . . . now we have a virus that doesn't really do anything too bad to people who are infected with it, but makes it harder for them to reproduce.

This post disgusts me. I can only imagine you have never conceived a child with severe anamolies. It is absolutely heartbreaking. And most of the time something completely out of control of the parents.
 
But I wanted to mention something.  This virus DOESN'T make it harder for people to reproduce. It only increases the chance that their off-spring will be born with severe disabilities. 

So those children may have a harder time reproducing; but they also get to lead a life of suffering in the meantime.

How about encouraging countries to educate their population on birth control and family planning, and having the government work to decrease sexual assualt and abuse.  Rather than just saying that deformed babies won't reproduce in the next generation so this is good population control.

Also relevant: many central & south American countries deliberately prevent access to contraception and outlaw abortion. These women who are being told not to get pregnant (because obviously only women make babies happen, men have nothing to do with it) often have no way of preventing pregnancy. it's horrible.

[I'm a red panda]

Just a side point often with this deformity it is a short life.

This is just an FYI, right? You're not trying to say that the suffering isn't so bad since they won't be around for long?

Microencephely is a really difficult diagnosis because it is so gray.  It can mean severe disability, it can mean almost nothing.

[Gin1984]

Just a side point often with this deformity it is a short life.

This is just an FYI, right? You're not trying to say that the suffering isn't so bad since they won't be around for long?

Microencephely is a really difficult diagnosis because it is so gray.  It can mean severe disability, it can mean almost nothing.

My jaw dropped when I read this, yes it was an FYI and more to the point do you think you should say well should we just do nothing and have a child have a short, painful life.  Because if so, why are you not starting it up here?  We keep babies that before would have been considered miscarriages alive through modern medicine, I don't think we should refuse to use that same medicine because they are in another country.

[I'm a red panda]

Just a side point often with this deformity it is a short life.

This is just an FYI, right? You're not trying to say that the suffering isn't so bad since they won't be around for long?

Microencephely is a really difficult diagnosis because it is so gray.  It can mean severe disability, it can mean almost nothing.

My jaw dropped when I read this, yes it was an FYI and more to the point do you think you should say well should we just do nothing and have a child have a short, painful life.  Because if so, why are you not starting it up here?  We keep babies that before would have been considered miscarriages alive through modern medicine, I don't think we should refuse to use that same medicine because they are in another country.

Thank God. Because I've heard the other side argued (a friend who lost a baby after 3 days was told not "at least he didn't suffer for long" by a coworker but "at least he didn't live very long". Not the way to console a grieving mother.). I wasn't exactly sure what you were bringing it up for- just to add more information about microcephaly or if it was somehow to go back to the arguement of using Zika for population control. Which is absolutely disgusting. 

[Daley]

Has anyone considered that maybe, just maybe, the Zika virus isn't actually responsible and that it's being misidentified from the real cause?

Correlation, causation, etc.

After all, of the 49 reported microcephaly related deaths, only five were confirmed to have been infected by Zika. If Zika's the real cause of this massive spike in deformities in the Brazilian population, shouldn't that infection rate of the effected number be much higher than ~10.2%?

Just thinking out loud here and trying to bring some critical thinking into the mix.

Though I don't doubt the potential for mutation in the virus, Zika's never caused these problems before in all the years we've known of it, yet this massive spate of neurological deformities that pop up in Brazil happen at the same time there's a drought in the area and not long after the government changes its method of mosquito larvicide fumigation (switched to pyriproxyfenin in 2014) to treat community water sources to combat against dengue. Although it is regarded as a safe additive, it's not uncommon or unheard of that these initial assessments were wrong, and that there were undiscovered effects or buried evidence of health concerns and toxicity with a huge cash cow product. The pharmaceutical industry does it all the time, should we expect any less from the pesticide camp... especially when the two industries are frequently owned by the same corporations?

Why blame nature so quickly when mankind's own hubris, incompetence and greed can be cited just as easily?

[Gin1984]

Has anyone considered that maybe, just maybe, the Zika virus isn't actually responsible and that it's being misidentified from the real cause?

Correlation, causation, etc.

After all, of the 49 reported microcephaly related deaths, only five were confirmed to have been infected by Zika. If Zika's the real cause of this massive spike in deformities in the Brazilian population, shouldn't that infection rate of the effected number be much higher than ~10.2%?

Just thinking out loud here and trying to bring some critical thinking into the mix.

Though I don't doubt the potential for mutation in the virus, Zika's never caused these problems before in all the years we've known of it, yet this massive spate of neurological deformities that pop up in Brazil happen at the same time there's a drought in the area and not long after the government changes its method of mosquito larvicide fumigation (switched to pyriproxyfenin in 2014) to treat community water sources to combat against dengue. Although it is regarded as a safe additive, it's not uncommon or unheard of that these initial assessments were wrong, and that there were undiscovered effects or buried evidence of health concerns and toxicity with a huge cash cow product. The pharmaceutical industry does it all the time, should we expect any less from the pesticide camp... especially when the two industries are frequently owned by the same corporations?

Why blame nature so quickly when mankind's own hubris, incompetence and greed can be cited just as easily?

Because your statements are inaccurate, IP.  The only ones saying what you are saying are the anti-vac group (a group with a bias and known to be lying in multiple cases).  There have been cases for prior to the change and in different areas (now that they go back and check).  Could it be that it is something else, possible which is why they are calling it a correlation not causation but is it likely that the crazies got something right, not probable.

[I'm a red panda]

Has anyone considered that maybe, just maybe, the Zika virus isn't actually responsible and that it's being misidentified from the real cause?

That seems to be exactly what the first post of this thread is about.


And why only look at the microcephely deaths? What about the children still living?

I'm not convinced Zika is the cause of the birth defects seen in Brazil; but the connection is certainly worth looking into, and being prudent about it until it is known is a good idea.

[MayDay]

The explanation I heard for why we are suddenly seeing this in South/Central American is this:

Zika has been around Asia for awhile.  Most people have it before childbearing age and develop immunity, thus they are unlikely to catch it while pregnant.  When it comes to a new area, fertile women have not already had it, so they can catch it for the first time while pregnant. 

I also recently read that they think it can be transferred in sperm for a long time after a man is sick- 4-6 weeks I think.

Feel free to ignore, I have no sources.  I have read a ton of articles and haven't kept track.   

I am very glad I am not doing any more childbearing.  I would like to see:
1.  Condoms for everyone!
2.  Other BC methods available widely even for poor people (IUDs are so awesome!)
3.  Abortions available for women who want one
4.  Some blame put on men, not just "don't get pregnant ladies, good luck!"

I know, I live in a dream world. 

[Daley]

That seems to be exactly what the first post of this thread is about.

And why only look at the microcephely deaths? What about the children still living?

I'm not convinced Zika is the cause of the birth defects seen in Brazil; but the connection is certainly worth looking into, and being prudent about it until it is known is a good idea.

I don't disagree on any front, but to so thoroughly dismiss out of hand the very real possibility of something like a newly switched to and possibly incompetently used larvicide in impoverished regions of a nation that's known for government corruption and incompetence as some are doing in this very thread simply because of a source bias when there's sufficient hard evidence to investigate and consider that avenue as well, seems foolish and short sighted.

[I'm a red panda]

I am very glad I am not doing any more childbearing.  I would like to see:
1.  Condoms for everyone!
2.  Other BC methods available widely even for poor people (IUDs are so awesome!)
3.  Abortions available for women who want one
4.  Some blame put on men, not just "don't get pregnant ladies, good luck!"

I know, I live in a dream world.

Can I add "mosquito control efforts"

That's how we've avoided most of the effects of things like West Nile, Chikungunya, malaria, dengue etc in the southern US that can be a problem in central america.

Because we really can't expect for women to just not get pregnant at all until herd immunity is established.  Although the list of things you mentioned would be WONDERFUL for all those women who would like to put off expanding their family or otherwise control their family size (perhaps they want to be done!)

[GuitarStv]

To play a little devil's advocate here . . . Should we even be looking for a cure?  Is this secretly a blessing in disguise?

We know that given free choice, people will only stop pumping out babies when their standard of living is already high enough to do massive environmental damage with fewer offspring.  So . . . now we have a virus that doesn't really do anything too bad to people who are infected with it, but makes it harder for them to reproduce.

It seems like a much gentler way to curb our population than the other likely natural way . . . a fullblown incurable pandemic that causes tremendous suffering and eventual death.

No.  Just, no.

Deformed babies as an acceptable means of controlling fertility?  No.

Choice?  What choice if you live in a slum with no health care?  With no protection against violent and predatory men?

If you are so worried about population control, do something positive (donate, volunteer) rather than advocating devastating diseases in poor people of colour.

Yes, GuitarStv's post doesn't do any favors for the overpopulation philosophy and those who advocate it.

This is a problem with a human face and a tragic reality. I have a hard time looking at the pictures of those poor babies in Brazil who suffer from this and their helpless parents who lack the financial resources to deal with the hand they have been dealt. Sure, you can argue that I'm only seeing those photos because of sensationalized media coverage, but it doesn't diminish the fact that this is a real tragedy for those who are living it.

I was more imagining a conspiracy plot that put the whole thing in play.  What if the Zika virus was a genetically engineered attempt at world wide population control, originated by someone as an ultimate act of charity by someone who believes we need to get population under control quickly.

Bill Gates invested an awful lot of money studying mosquitoes for his anti-malarial treatments.  Zika is supposed to have originated from mosquitoes . . .

This stuff writes itself.

[justajane]

I thought they have isolated the Zika virus in the aborted tissue of some fetuses with microcephaly. I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, but that does point strongly to causation rather than correlation.

Most of the mentions I saw about the link between the microcephaly and the larvicide were on websites that clearly have it out for Monsanto or Natural News cites.

But why are we debating this at all? It's clearly the Tdap booster. Wake up, sheeple! (wink, wink)

[Kaydedid]

I thought they have isolated the Zika virus in the aborted tissue of some fetuses with microcephaly. I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, but that does point strongly to causation rather than correlation.

Most of the mentions I saw about the link between the microcephaly and the larvicide were on websites that clearly have it out for Monsanto or Natural News cites.

But why are we debating this at all? It's clearly the Tdap booster. Wake up, sheeple! (wink, wink)

Do you know where the aborted fetuses were from?  Most of the affected countries look like they would not allow legal abortions for microcephaly.

I'm wondering if the numbers of children born with microencephaly are truly accurate.  I know in the US, the majority of children with serious disabilities are aborted, which makes the birthrate numbers very different from true epidemiological rates.  In wealthier countries like Brazil where this disability could be detected prenatally, I'd be shocked if there weren't at least a few cases of illegal abortions happening, which could make a big impact on the numbers for such a rare disease.

[justajane]

I thought they have isolated the Zika virus in the aborted tissue of some fetuses with microcephaly. I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, but that does point strongly to causation rather than correlation.

Most of the mentions I saw about the link between the microcephaly and the larvicide were on websites that clearly have it out for Monsanto or Natural News cites.

But why are we debating this at all? It's clearly the Tdap booster. Wake up, sheeple! (wink, wink)

Do you know where the aborted fetuses were from?  Most of the affected countries look like they would not allow legal abortions for microcephaly.

I'm wondering if the numbers of children born with microencephaly are truly accurate.  I know in the US, the majority of children with serious disabilities are aborted, which makes the birthrate numbers very different from true epidemiological rates.  In wealthier countries like Brazil where this disability could be detected prenatally, I'd be shocked if there weren't at least a few cases of illegal abortions happening, which could make a big impact on the numbers for such a rare disease.

I'm not sure, but abortion doesn't just refer to elective abortions. It could have been a spontaneous abortion, a.k.a. a miscarriage. Although, I recall the article said a 24 week fetus, which would be a stillbirth and not a miscarriage. 

Edited to add that the New England Journal of Medicine reported the testing of an aborted 29 week fetus in the United States of a woman who had contracted the Zika virus in her first trimester while living in Brazil. So, the elective abortion occurred here after determining via ultrasound that the fetus had severe microcephaly.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1600651

[I'm a red panda]

I thought they have isolated the Zika virus in the aborted tissue of some fetuses with microcephaly. I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, but that does point strongly to causation rather than correlation.

Most of the mentions I saw about the link between the microcephaly and the larvicide were on websites that clearly have it out for Monsanto or Natural News cites.

But why are we debating this at all? It's clearly the Tdap booster. Wake up, sheeple! (wink, wink)

Do you know where the aborted fetuses were from?  Most of the affected countries look like they would not allow legal abortions for microcephaly.

I'm wondering if the numbers of children born with microencephaly are truly accurate.  I know in the US, the majority of children with serious disabilities are aborted, which makes the birthrate numbers very different from true epidemiological rates.  In wealthier countries like Brazil where this disability could be detected prenatally, I'd be shocked if there weren't at least a few cases of illegal abortions happening, which could make a big impact on the numbers for such a rare disease.

I'm not sure, but abortion doesn't just refer to elective abortions. It could have been a spontaneous abortion, a.k.a. a miscarriage. Although, I recall the article said a 24 week fetus, which would be a stillbirth and not a miscarriage. 

Edited to add that the New England Journal of Medicine reported the testing of an aborted 29 week fetus in the United States of a woman who had contracted the Zika virus in her first trimester while living in Brazil. So, the elective abortion occurred here after determining via ultrasound that the fetus had severe microcephaly.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1600651

Note that "here" based on the link shown is actually Europe, not the US.

There is only one place, as far as I can tell from previous research into the topic, that will do an elective abortion at 29-weeks in the United States.  It is my understanding that clinic does not provide autopsies.
Even when a fetus is considered non-viable, if you get that far along (even if it was the doctor's that didn't find the condition, not the mother who did not seek appropriate care) before finding nearly every state makes you just wait it out until the baby dies on its own.  If the baby is going to survive with severe anomalies that leads to near the worst quality of life, the family just has to deal with it and the to-be born baby suffer.
(Possibly there are some states that do not have an actual limit imposed by law- but there are no doctors that perform the procedure.)
The exceptions for when the mother's life is at risk to not include medical reasons such as these, since the mother is generally not at a greater risk of death than any other pregnant woman (though note, pregnancy on its own is a condition that carries risk.)

This article also states that the pregnancy was terminated at 32 weeks; the anomalies were found at 29 weeks.

[FIRE me]

Has anyone considered that maybe, just maybe, the Zika virus isn't actually responsible and that it's being misidentified from the real cause?

That seems to be exactly what the first post of this thread is about.

That's not what I meant at all. I thought the question was plain. I was not doubting that Zika is a highly likely cause of microcephaly.

So I'll reword it. What I wanted to know is, if a pregnant woman catches the Zika virus, then what would be the odds of her baby being born with microcephaly? 

[I'm a red panda]

So I'll reword it. What I wanted to know is, if a pregnant woman catches the Zika virus, then what would be the odds of her baby being born with microcephaly?

Interesting- I didn't  get that at all from the first post. Sorry.


The answer seems to be "it isn't known yet".


But your 1% risk estimate in the first post would actually be a very HIGH risk; not low.  In the US, for instance, it only occurs in 1/25,000 births.

[scottish]

What if the Zika virus was a genetically engineered attempt at world wide population control, originated by someone as an ultimate act of charity by someone who believes we need to get population under control quickly.

Sounds like science fiction.  In fact it's in the book Drakon by S.M Stirling.   Except the fictional one worked.

The WHO caught a lot of flak for down playing the ebola out-breaks in Africa.   I think they're being more cautious with Zika.

[Inaya]

I was more imagining a conspiracy plot that put the whole thing in play.  What if the Zika virus was a genetically engineered attempt at world wide population control, originated by someone as an ultimate act of charity by someone who believes we need to get population under control quickly.

George R. R. Martin wrote a scifi short story about this, actually. It's in an anthology called Tuf Voyaging.