Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'd just like to point out that the CDC itself has published papers detailing the origins of the Haitian cholera strain: http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/17/7/11-0059_article

As another example, Lee Katz, CDC's chief bioinformatician for the labs that study diseases like cholera (Who, full disclosure, used to work with my lab on Vibrio stuff): http://mbio.asm.org/content/4/4/e00398-13.short

There have been articles by other groups directly addressing the introduction of cholera by aid workers. The CDC also talks about this issue directly during conferences and presentations as an event that we need to learn from.




Well that seems to completely invalidate the article's premise. Thanks for this.

Now I just need somewhere else to direct my armchair rage...


Here's the actual quote from the CDC report linked above:

"Meille village hosted a MINUSTAH camp, which was set up just above a stream flowing into the Artibonite River. Newly incoming Nepalese soldiers arrived there on October 9, 12, and 16. The Haitian epidemiologists observed sanitary deficiencies, including a pipe discharging sewage from the camp into the river. Villagers used water from this stream for cooking and drinking.

On October 21, the epidemic was also investigated in several wards of Mirebalais. Inhabitants of Mirebalais drew water from the rivers because the water supply network was being repaired. Notably, prisoners drank water from the same river, downstream from Meille. No other cause was found for the 34 cases and 4 deaths reported in the prison.

On October 31, it was observed that sanitary deficiencies in the camp had been corrected. At the same time, daily incidence of cholera tended to decrease. Afterwards, incidence rose again to reach a second peak on November 10 "


I'm feeling Internet famous today, thanks! We had a ton of people on that study who contributed greatly, and I was happy to participate with a couple of follow up studies. I won't make any comments on the article because I don't want to be political (I'm a big stone-turner and not a politician if you know what I mean), but I like seeing an active conversation!


Yeah, a much more likely explanation is the one the CDC actually gave: That map was made with a specific purpose, and source tracing wasn't it.


Those papers are actually mentioned in the article.


Only the first linked article is mentioned, and the author blithely ignores the actual conclusions and misrepresents them... The author of this article pushes the narrative that CDC is hiding this information any chance he gets (presumably to sell his book).




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: