Warning to Families and Couples in Tropical Americas: Zika Spreading Fast.

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by Lizzy Belle

Completely agree.
The more people are aware, the better & more people can prevent getting bitten / sick.

Originally Posted by Lizzy Belle

Ah, is THAT how that happens! Was wondering, since some of my friends left as a couple and returned with one or two small crew members extra

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by GoingWalkabout

Looks like Summer in Canada and Winter in Chile is the best if mosquitoes like you. Neither place have the mosquito that carries the virus.

Anyone sailing USA, Caribbean, Central America and Pacific Islands should seriously be investing in mosquito covers for use on all entry ways from dusk till morning. Long sleeves and long pants with anti mosquito spray (they are toxic) in remaining exposed areas. Other anti winged pest strategies can be using blue light zappers and or citronella lamps for your back of boat sundowners.

Those lucky enough to have catamarans are able to use zippered mosquito enclosures around their cockpits. Great for inviting others not so lucky to have such a comfortable protected area at the marina over for drinks. Just a thought.

Here is a device that seems interesting.

Alpha Mosquito Trap (PRO 900) | Mega-Catchâ„¢ Mosquito Traps

By the way these little creatures come out 2 hours before nightfall to start eating. They are not active in temperatures bellow 80 F. They are attracted to dark clothes. Also to perfume. They have heat seeking sensors and follow after C02, your breath. Some mosquito traps use C02 emitting gas systems. Don't tell the global warming crowd.

Anyway here is an interesting report in the safety of Canada and Chile. One thing I don't understand about this travel warning report is that it doesn't warn against travel to the United States. The USA is now an infected region. Perhaps they are more concerned about politics.

Aedes mosquitoes -- the main vector for Zika transmission -- are present in all the region's countries except Canada and continental Chile," the statement said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention urged pregnant women to postpone travel to Bolivia, Brazil, Cape Verde, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Martinique, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Saint Martin, Suriname, Samoa, Venezuela and Puerto Rico.*

Hi GW,

Thanks for the list. Useful.

I think that the reason US isn't mentioned is that although Aedes genus mosquitoes are present there, there are still too few cases in the US (around a dozen) to be classed as an epidemic or a general public danger, and represented cases of people who had travelled to endemic areas and were found to be sick upon return. But the danger there of an epidmic starting is high. The current main areas of concern are highlighted nicely in the graphic from the CDC linked below.

http://www.cdc.gov/zika/geo/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...united-states/

[boatman61]

Well you can lay odds on that its in Europe.. its having dramatic effects in Brazil by all accounts and Portugal is to many in Brazil, the mother country.. so much to and fro..
and.. it travels in our blood.

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Well you can lay odds on that its in Europe.. its having dramatic effects in Brazil by all accounts and Portugal is to many in Brazil, the mother country.. so much to and fro..
and.. it travels in our blood.

It would not surprise at all, though has yet to make a statistically/epidemiologically significant appearance… yet. What I find so insidious about it is the fact that it has few or sometimes no symptoms in adults, but yet such profound and awful implications for infants… lifelong disability and deformity.

[hblask]

Originally Posted by Lizzy Belle

Citing Wikipedia as a trusted source of information ...

I never understand this sentiment. From what I can tell, Wikipedia is more accurate, update, and well-sourced than 99% of mainstream media, and far more accurate than the old-fashioned sources such as encyclopedias.

Just because it is new doesn't mean it is less reliable. Yes, occasionally people post "prank" updates, but they are usually obvious, and are caught and fixed quickly -- within hours. Wiki should be everyone's first source, keeping in mind that last bit of doubt about pranks, and double-checking anything that seems too weird.

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by hblask

I never understand this sentiment. From what I can tell, Wikipedia is more accurate, update, and well-sourced than 99% of mainstream media, and far more accurate than the old-fashioned sources such as encyclopedias.

Just because it is new doesn't mean it is less reliable. Yes, occasionally people post "prank" updates, but they are usually obvious, and are caught and fixed quickly -- within hours. Wiki should be everyone's first source, keeping in mind that last bit of doubt about pranks, and double-checking anything that seems too weird.

Do we really have to have this thread degenerate into some slanging match about relative source quality? Anyhow… I used to edit Wikipedia plenty. I also used to teach Philosophy at university level, sit on the editorial boards of various academic journals and publish and edit philosophical and scientific papers, so I have a few editorial skills. Your faith is misplaced. Wikipedia is full of pundits, paid publicists, professional partisan editors, cranks and self promoters. And no, their edits are not always obvious, but designed to be subtle precisely so they will not be rapidly removed. I have been in enough edit wars on Wikipedia to know of what I speak. Have you? It is useful as a general rough tool, but does it beat the CDC for example, on this sort of topic? Please. Your very faith in its veracity and accuracy (so very common as it is among net users) combined with its open edit nature and the power inherent in the control of knowledge and slant precisely shows how its reliability is inevitably and constantly questionable. Anyhow that is the last I will comment on this distracting sub thread.

[MarkJ]

Well, I much prefer the scientific approach and thank Alan for his input. More scientific than diplomatic in some peoples opinion but vastly better than uninformed.

This particular mosquito is NOT one that comes at dusk but is a daytime biter, coming out after dawn and several hours before dusk.

The are easily identifiable by the white stripe on their legs but you don't hear them!

Why?
Read this link for the amswer plus photos, habits and habitat.
(No, its not the Daily Mail, sorry)
Dengue Transmission by Aedes aegypti Mosquito


Mark

[Bulawayo]

Thanks for the heads up - no pun intended.
This is not too severe in males, with most infected people not even being aware; symptoms: conjunctivitis, slightly raised temperature, aches and pains.
Within pregnant women it can lead to microcephaly (resulting in reduced craniums). Deaths have been reported amongst infants. There is no vaccine.
The present school of thoughts is take the usual anti-mosquito precautions - nets, cover up, repellant. The guilty party is the Aedes mosquito which incidently also is responsible for Dengue and Chikungunya.

Originally Posted by Muckle Flugga

It seems this is developing into a very serious issue, and will spread beyond the tropics, it seems. One more reason to defend very carefully against moquito bites.

Zika virus: Outbreak 'likely to spread across Americas' says WHO - BBC News

[MarkJ]

Below is an image of graphs showing the biting habits during a 24 hour period.

So splatter on the insect repellent all day!



Sent from a stupid phone that replaces words with weird stuff.

[Bulawayo]

Without wishing to go off subject we started out as a couple and somewhere, somehow, four little people came along.

Originally Posted by Lizzy Belle

Completely agree.
The more people are aware, the better & more people can prevent getting bitten / sick.



Ah, is THAT how that happens! Was wondering, since some of my friends left as a couple and returned with one or two small crew members extra

[Capn Jimbo]

"Some mosquito traps use C02 emitting gas systems. Don't tell the global warming crowd"

It's one thing to create a straw man, what's worse is creating the straw to make it with, lol. Cheap and extremely forced - and unnecessary politicization.

As far as criticising the "tone" of the poster who successfully demonstrated the data lite and hysteria/ratings oriented report of the BBC, while he added significant good and valuable information? Really? Has this thread devolved to this point where crossed "i's" and dotted "t's" become more important than the legitimate attempt to add balance - and LOTS of data?

Too late. As for me, I'd prefer is those who have engaged in polemics consider decaf...

[hamburking]

Originally Posted by Muckle Flugga

It seems this is developing into a very serious issue, and will spread beyond the tropics, it seems. One more reason to defend very carefully against moquito bites.

Excellent advice. I did not take ticks seriously, until my daughter got Lyme disease. Entirely my fault.

I don't think this Zika is the zombie apocalypse, but it does sound a lot like the opening scenes of many of the epidemic based movies. This does sound like it has the potential to be a very serious global issue.

[GoingWalkabout]

Originally Posted by Capn Jimbo

It's one thing to create a straw man, what's worse is creating the straw to make it with, lol. Cheap and extremely forced - and unnecessary politicization.

As far as criticising the "tone" of the poster who successfully demonstrated the data lite and hysteria/ratings oriented report of the BBC, while he added significant good and valuable information? Really? Has this thread devolved to this point where crossed "i's" and dotted "t's" become more important than the legitimate attempt to add balance - and LOTS of data?

Too late. As for me, I'd prefer is those who have engaged in polemics consider decaf...

I posted a link to an effective mosquito catcher. Reportedly catching 4,000 skin piercing beasts in an hour. Their top of the line unit uses a gas canister of C02 that is used to attract mosquitoes. They are highly attracted to this as it is primarily human C02 emitted from breathing that the home in on.

Now I made a tongue in cheek comment about GW and someone takes offence. Let me just say that "many a truth is spoken in jest". I'm just waiting for some GW evangelist to outlaw this device because of Co2 emissions. Just like some well meaning multi billion environmentalist lobbied and killed off the use of insecticide spraying in Africa resulting in the gigantic increase of mosquito born diseases and an uncounted number of deaths. His solution now is to hand out mosquito nets in the African villages.

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by Capn Jimbo

It's one thing to create a straw man, what's worse is creating the straw to make it with, lol. Cheap and extremely forced - and unnecessary politicization.

As far as criticising the "tone" of the poster who successfully demonstrated the data lite and hysteria/ratings oriented report of the BBC, while he added significant good and valuable information? Really? Has this thread devolved to this point where crossed "i's" and dotted "t's" become more important than the legitimate attempt to add balance - and LOTS of data?

Too late. As for me, I'd prefer is those who have engaged in polemics consider decaf...

Seriously? Hypocrisy much? (Adds nothing but polemic and controversy to thread on serious health crisis involving deformed babies, then complains about engagement in polemics). Who made this about the freaking BBC?

Good grief. Thanks a lot.

[Dr. Sea]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mighty
For the most part, Wikipedia entries (read the wikipedia entry on zika for yourself - do yourself a favour MF!) are based on published science. You can follow the clues I gave to read the story of the Foys yourself. Or research what happened in Tahiti, Yap etc.

BBC is just another mass media. So a low proportion of data. A lot of ink wasted on pictures, colours etc.

Did you find a reference in the BBC story to what has happened in the Pacific, such as in Yap, Tahiti, etc? Or to the blood transfusion risk? Just the briefest mention of human sexual transmission. For that matter do the NIH warnings talk about the experiences in the Indian Ocean or the Pacific?

Wikipedia backs its story up with links to the historical experience. I tried in my short piece (which didn't come from Wikipedia - I have other sources) to do the same with a high data/ink ratio. Did BBC? Or was it more ink than data?

Originally Posted by Muckle Flugga

I don't really like the tone of this post. It sounds like personal grandstanding for some reason. And… Wikipedia? Really?

Grandstanding? Well, look at the ID of the person who posted it: Alan MIGHTY.