Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
12. This doesn't seem very plausible at all.
Sun Feb 14, 2016, 02:17 PM
Feb 2016

There have been a few western cases, notably this one, in which zika has been found.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-zika-science-idUSKCN0VJ2M7

If zika is causing neural birth defects, then it is likely that these cases will emerge in Columbia over the next four or five months.

Zika probably got to Columbia later. There probably hasn't been time.

http://www.virology.ws/2016/02/10/zika-virus-and-microcephaly/

It doesn't seem possible that zika causes birth defects in all or most exposed pregnancies. Nor are the tests that great - they probably have false positives and false negatives.

https://www.rt.com/news/332391-colombia-zika-spread-pregnant/

Also, be aware that Brazil's screening for microcephaly is probably catching some normal kids. They are just using a size index. In the US, when non-acute microcephaly is detected in infants the standard is watchful waiting.

Finally, the pattern of eye and brain defects found is odd, and seems unlikely to be from a toxin. The chemical being blamed her has been around for quite some time, and is used in flea medicines in the US. I would think any such association would have shown up long before.


Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Is it really Zika Virus, ...»Reply #12