
Many in West Africa Are Thought to Be Immune, but Finding Them Will Not Be Easy - Libertatea
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/06/health/ebola-immunity.html
======
richardwigley
"Right now, there are about 1,800 survivors of the current West African
outbreak, all of whom are now immune, of course. But there may be many
thousands more."

Well, that's conjecture, oddly enough, reinfecting people with a deadly
disease has various ethical issues - so there aren't any experiments to look
at.

When it was tested with primates [1] they all survived after a 10 week period
but 2 out of 6 died after 13 week period. How this works for humans god knows
but 'all of whom are now immune' I wouldn't be so confident.

[1]
[http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/131128/srep03365/full/srep03...](http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/131128/srep03365/full/srep03365.html)

------
lobo_tuerto
Immune to what? Should keep the original title.

~~~
Bud
If you look at the light-grey note at the bottom of the article, you will find
this:

 _A version of this article appears in print on September 6, 2014, on page A10
of the New York edition with the headline: Many in West Africa Are Thought to
Be Immune, but Finding Them Will Not Be Easy._

So that was the original (printed) title.

~~~
lobo_tuerto
You know what I meant, right? And the article mentioned as the source is not
linkable.

------
ihnorton
The hypothesis is that immunity is conferred by the presence of ebola
antibodies developed after very-low-dose exposure from eating fruits visited
by infected bats.

> His teams took 4,349 blood samples in 220 randomly selected villages. They
> found that 15 percent of Gabon’s population had antibodies. But it varied
> widely: near the coast, only 3 percent did; in some jungle villages near the
> Congo border, up to 34 percent did.

>Also, their antibody levels varied widely, and what level is protective is
roughly known for lab monkeys, but not for humans.

