Healthcare worker was wearing CDC approved protective gear.

[SheilaT]

40. Basically, yes.

And it is quite deadly, killing half or more of its victims.

It is probably that the reason Duncan died was because he was sent home even though he was already symptomatic, and was very sick by the time he returned to the hospital. It's possible that nothing at all could have saved him, even the blood or plasma from others who have recovered. We will never know.

It does look as if getting people into hospital and treating them as quickly as possible, meaning at the first sign of symptoms, may save most people. But if by some horrible chance we get a few dozen, let alone several hundred, people sick here with Ebola, our ability to properly care for them will not be as wonderful as it is right now when we've had what? three people so far? No, four, because there's the camera man.

And care can be crucial, even in far less deadly diseases. Influenza, for example, is something that the vast majority of people are going to survive just fine. But if, for instance, everyone in the household is sick with flu at the same time, and there's no one available to fix a little food, to make sure that the sick ones get fluids, then more will die than would if only one person is sick at a time. I remember reading somewhere about the 1918 flu epidemic, and that was one thing that was pointed out, that in that epidemic (pandemic because it was world-wide) so many people were sick at once, that even minimal care wasn't happening for a lot of people, and so they died. Now I'm not discounting the fact that it was a particularly virulent strain that time, but when there's no one well enough or available to help, there will be many more deaths than might otherwise happen.