Via GuinéeConakry.info, more on an awkward dispute: EBOLA IN GUINEA: Confusion in com '. Excerpt from a Google translation:
The Ebola virus epidemic continues its devastating progression in Guinea. While the victims continue to succumb, one after the other, the chain propagation, it is far from being under control. However, notwithstanding this dimension both tragic and dramatic, the country's authorities and their partners are no better than engaging in an adversarial communication that leaves the public confused.
Between WHO announces 208 dead and the national management committee of the disease, he does that counts 126 fatal cases, people do not know to what source to trust. With an abysmal gap 82 people we do not know whether they are alive or dead, joke frieze crime. Hence the need to harmonize approaches claiming responsibility it takes.
On its website, the World Health Organization (WHO) is categorical: "The cumulative number of cases and deaths from Ebola haemorrhagic fever in Guinea now stands at 328 (193 laboratory confirmed, 80 probable 55 suspects), including 208 deaths."
This information dating from June 4. Three days after Saturday, June 7, the national management committee of the disease, it provides the following statistics: "206 confirmed cases of hemorrhagic fever with 126 deaths. 51 people healed, 29 confirmed positive patients hospitalized."
To justify the difference, the Guinean authorities invoke a "mistake" to have been committed by experts UN body. Minister of International Cooperation same indicates that the WHO representative allegedly admitted the fact. Believing in his right, a member of the Management Committee, Fode Sylla Tass, has even allowed some unfriendly comments, as a moral lesson.
Naturally, it is quite possible that the Guinean authorities have reason. The problem though is that so far the UN agency has not formally denied reports he disseminated. Better, they are still on the WHO website. What if the Guinean allegations are true, would be very unfortunate from an instance of the caliber of the World Health Organization. At this level of responsibility, it is not conceivable that it plays with such sensitive issues.
But we can also think that WHO experts refrained from reacting not to embarrass the State of Guinea. The issue of sovereignty is also delicate, some organizations prefer not to get into unnecessary controversy. They just often do the work that is their own and to be limited to this level.
But it follows that in reality, the Guinean government is doing everything to stifle and hide information on the epidemic. What some suspected since the communication strategy has changed. Suspicions now fed by a virtual absence of communication. The few bits that you learn are those in the press. This is the manifestation of the disease and its resurgence Télimélé Macenta.