Shock W.H.O. report: Ebola has 42-day incubation period, not 21 days!

(NaturalNews) A jaw-dropping report released by the World Health Organization on October 14, 2014 reveals that 1 in 20 Ebola infections has an incubation period longer than the 21 days which has been repeatedly claimed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.

This may be the single most important -- and blatantly honest -- research report released by any official body since the beginning of the Ebola outbreak. The WHO's "Ebola situation assessment" report, found here, explains that only 95% of Ebola infections experience incubation within the widely-reported 21-day period. Here's the actual language from the report:

95% of confirmed cases have an incubation period in the range of 1 to 21 days; 98% have an incubation period that falls within the 1 to 42 day interval. [1]

Unless the sentence structure is somehow misleading, this passage appears to indicate the following:

• 95% of Ebola incubations occur from 1 - 21 days
• 3% of Ebola incubations occur from 21 - 42 days
• 2% of Ebola incubations are not explained (why?)

If this interpretation of the WHO's statistics are correct, it would mean that:

• 1 in 20 Ebola infections may result in incubations lasting significantly longer than 21 days

• The 21-day quarantine currently being enforced by the CDC is entirely insufficient to halt an outbreak

• People who are released from observation or self-quarantine after 21 days may still become full-blown Ebola patients in the subsequent three weeks, even if they have shown no symptoms of infection during the first 21 days. (Yes, read that again...)

Any declaration that an outbreak is over requires 42 days with no new infections

Underscoring the importance of the 42-day rule, the WHO document openly states that a 42-day observation period with no new outbreaks is required before declaring the outbreak is under control. In the WHO's own words:

WHO is therefore confident that detection of no new cases, with active surveillance in place, throughout this 42-day period means that an Ebola outbreak is indeed over. [1]

W.H.O. "alarmed" over false pronouncements of negative Ebola tests

Just as disturbing is the WHO's open warning that government health officials who are announcing negative Ebola findings in patients mere hours after them being tested are grossly misleading the public and essentially practicing quack medicine.

As explained by the WHO:

WHO is alarmed by media reports of suspected Ebola cases imported into new countries that are said, by government officials or ministries of health, to be discarded as "negative" within hours after the suspected case enters the country. Such rapid determination of infection status is impossible, casting grave doubts on some of the official information that is being communicated to the public and the media. [1]

In other words, WHO is telling us that all those public pronouncements by government health authorities are meaningless. An Ebola infection determination cannot be made in mere hours, it turns out. In fact, as WHO explains, a suspected case of Ebola must be observed and tested for 48 hours before any degree of certainty can be reached about the Ebola infection status:

Two negative RT-PCR test results, at least 48 hours apart, are required for a clinically asymptomatic patient to be discharged from hospital, or for a suspected Ebola case to be discarded as testing negative for the virus. [1]

"No signs" that outbreaks are under control

Finally, this WHO report goes on to conclude that the Ebola outbreaks of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone are multiplying out of control. The report even cites the curious phenomenon of unexpected outbreak surges taking place in areas once thought to be eradicated:

In Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, new cases continue to explode in areas that looked like they were coming under control. An unusual characteristic of this epidemic is a persistent cyclical pattern of gradual dips in the number of new cases, followed by sudden flare-ups. WHO epidemiologists see no signs that the outbreaks in any of these 3 countries are coming under control. [1]

Is it possible that these resurging outbreaks are being caused by governments failing to monitor potentially infected Ebola victims for a full 42 days? If they only observe them for 21 days, then 1 out of 20 infected victims may be cleared as "clean" and allowed back into the population where they soon become symptomatic and spread the disease even further.

U.S. doctors and health officials have been taught the wrong number: 21 days is only HALF the duration

It is extremely disturbing to realize that, to our best knowledge, every single person in the United States who has been suspected of harboring Ebola has been instructed to monitor symptoms for only 21 days, not the necessary 42 days.

This means that Ebola-infected U.S. citizens who are "cleared" of Ebola may still erupt with the deadly virus for a period of three more weeks.

Why hasn't anyone reported this until now? How is this not one of the single most important pieces of information in the world at this moment when all human life on our planet is now legitimately threatened by an uncontrolled viral outbreak with a 70 percent fatality rate and no recognized treatments or cures?

Prepare yourself now with the free downloadable MP3 audio files at www.BioDefense.com

Sources for this article include:
[1] http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/14...

http://www.naturalnews.com/047267_Ebola_outbreak_incubation_period_viral_transmission.html