Originally published December 16 2014
There's no evidence that sewage isn't teeming with Ebola virus, according to researchers disputing WHO's claims
by Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
(NaturalNews) Practically nothing coming out of the mouths of government health officials these days concerning the spread of Ebola virus is scientifically verifiable. And in a new study, researchers from two prominent universities in Pennsylvania challenge specific claims by the World Health Organization (WHO) that Ebola dies in waste sewage, showing that this simply isn't true based on published science.
Kyle Bibby, an assistant professor of civil engineering at the University of Pittsburgh, pored through as much research as he could find on the subject and came to the conclusion that nobody really knows how long Ebola survives on surfaces or in waste water. The research has never been conducted, despite dogmatic claims to the contrary.
Pitt research questions WHO findings on Ebola viabilityIn a paper published in the American Chemical Society journal Environmental Science & Technology Letters, Bibby and his colleagues from nearby Drexel University explain that the data just doesn't exist on survival times for the Ebola virus under various environmental circumstances. How long the virus remains on surfaces or in water needs far more investigation, they concluded.
"The World Health Organization has been saying you can put (human waste) in pit latrines or ordinary sanitary sewers and that the virus then dies," stated Bibby. "But the literature lacks evidence that it does. They may be right, but the evidence isn't there."
Data on environmental Ebola persistence 'limited,' says professor According to the study, data on Ebola survival rates is severely lacking, though you would hardly know this by listening to WHO or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Though environmental exposure is not the prevailing transmission route for Ebola and similar hemorrhagic viruses, its potential spread via these routes is noteworthy.
"In general, there are limited data on the environmental persistence or disinfection of Ebola virus available in the open literature," explains the study. "Additionally, while environmental exposure is not the dominant exposure route, available data suggest that it is imprudent to dismiss the potential of environmental transmission without further evidence."
An abstract of Bibby's study is available here: Ebola Study by University of Pittsburgh
Government lied about Ebola surviving on dry surfaces; may also be lying about sewers One of the reasons why government agencies need to keep quiet when the science is lacking on subjects of this importance was illustrated by a separate study published in the Journal of Applied Microbiology. As we reported back in October, scientists from the U.K. found that Ebola can survive on dry surfaces for up to 50 days, contradicting the official Ebola narrative.
The mainstream media completely ignored this study, which was published back in 2010, and proceeded this past fall to falsely reassure the public that only direct contact with bodily fluids is of concern when it comes to the risk of contracting Ebola. Similarly, the media continues to promote the theory that Ebola can't survive in sewers, even though it is possible that it can.
The good news is that further research on Ebola survival, at least in sewers and water treatment plants, will soon commence thanks to a $110,000 research grant recently awarded to Bibby by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Using similar surrogate viruses, Bibby and his team will study the survival potential of Ebola in waste water in order to better inform authorities on how to handle it.
"A significant research effort, including environmental persistence studies and microbial risk assessment, is necessary to inform the safe handling and disposal of Ebola virus-contaminated waste, especially liquid waste in the wastewater collection and treatment system," added Bibby in his most recent study.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml