Why is it important for ebola to aquire airborne activities via a
evolutionary route? This requires all sorts of particulars in the disease
that ebola may be unable to reasonable aquire. In order to be a good
airborne infection the virus must be secreted into the nasopharynx in such
quantities (without creating a secretion that would not form nice droplets,
I would not think blood clots would form a very good aerosol) that sneezing
would form a good mode of transition.
If a microbe is being used in a weapon wouldn't it be made in fermentors
instead of people? Wouldn't the mode of transmition be a weapon not
person-to-person contact? I would think that many organisms that "are not"
transmitted by aerosol could be easily transmitted by aerosol if someone
tried hard enough. The problem may not be so much biology (and certainly
not evolutionary biology) but physics.
Deano wrote in message <#Lu20YKD#GA.176 at upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>...
>>>>You also can't say that it is only a matter of time before airborne
>>>>strains of Ebola occur. You do not know that for a fact. They could
>>>>have been airborne way back down the evolutionary ladder and it wasn't
>>>>a good strategy so the virus evolved other modes of transmission.
>more hardy than the average virus.
>>Maybe it wasn't a good evolutionary strategy a few 1000 or million years
>but it might be now. Just because it hasn't become airborne recently (I
>that in the evolutionary time scale) it might still retain the genetic
>information to do so.