I dunno, Mrrzy, maybe I just don't read the right news. I'm not much of a news hound, for the most part just listen to NPR and scan the headlines of a few mainstream media outlets on line. But I don't think more than 3 or 4 days have gone by since this outbreak began that I haven't seen or heard front page news regarding it- maybe not one of the top 5 stories, but still front page.

As of mid July, since the Ebola virus first appeared and was identified in humans in 1976(?) there were 3584 confirmed human cases known to the world, of which 2270 people died. (I know both numbers have gone up in the last 2 weeks, and will continue to climb in the course of this current outbreak.) Obviously a very deadly disease. But when countries, especially African countries regarding Ebola, decide how to use resources (or how they want helper countries to use resources) for research or public health, they have obviously had to focus on more prevalent and widespread diseases that threaten and kill many more people (at least so far.) Think Malaria. Think AIDS. Think Cholera.

Because the virus is so rare and clinical trials on humans so very expensive, pharmaceutical companies have not been much involved - they would go bankrupt very quickly from the cost of the trials, given the very limited potential market for any vaccine or drugs developed.

Because the USA identified the virus as a potential bioterrorism weapon against which our government desires to develop the means to protect our own population, the US government has by far been the largest spender on research - Dept. of Defense, NIH and NIAID. There doesn't appear to be any central place to look to find total funding of research by US tax dollars so I can't quote figures. Found two grant projects going back to 2007 that add up to about $132 million. I expect there are more dollars that are included in grants to study multiple diseases in the same category. That is not a lot of money - except it is a lot of money in proportion to the actual number of infections and deaths caused by Ebola over the past 40 years until now when compared to tax funded research per infected person for other diseases historically.

Regardless of the original motives that can get Congress to appropriate funds, the research is not proprietary, as would be the case with for profit funded research, and the USA has an excellent record of sharing health related publicly funded research freely, and to encourage use of such findings as are made to promote public health and disease prevention around the world.

I am certain, in addition to the many health care volunteers from around the world, including the USA, that our CDC, DOD, NIH, NIAID and a number of other federal agencies, not to mention knowledgeable people at university research centers around the country and around the world, are offering all the assistance and expertise they can and that is accepted, to the countries in Africa experiencing this current outbreak.

Let me confess, neither my doctor brother-in-law nor my doctor nephew are in Africa now, treating Ebola patients. But their specialties would not make them very useful treating infectious diseases in general- both are anesthesiologists. But both have been to Africa several times with different aid organizations. I am acquainted with 3 doctors and 2 nurses who recently returned from treating Ebola patients in west Africa. I know many other health care providers who yearly take time from their regular practice to volunteer in Africa and other 3rd world countries to provide health care that never makes the news. I know other health care professionals at the university medical centers in my region who are spending much time and effort in training and consulting with "people on the ground." These individuals who make the choice to go put boots on the ground are able to do this because of networks of others - family, friends, church or synagogue or mosque or ashram, colleagues in their private practices or at their institutions or employers, and the institutions or employers themselves, some governmental, some with some governmental funding, some entirely private or corporate, who support them. Money, supplies, expertise, computers or computer networks - all manner of in kind help and support.

And where I live and who I know is not unique in terms of our society or our locale. So don't tell me, Greg, that "dead wogs won't bother anyone." You insult countless people and institutions with that blanket, ignorant, thoughtless, statement. Not just in the USA, but in first world countries where ever they are.

Mrrzy, mg, and Gref F. Do you donate time or money to efforts to help others? You may well do so.

mg, while I am sure your measures would be effective, I am always struck by what seems to me a very simplistic paradigm that does not give any weight to cultural differences or the rights of individuals. That dynamic between the social and the individual is always a messy and ever shifting fulcrom, but not to you. I respect and understand you are entitled to your paradigm, but it is pretty scary to me.