> The outbreak is centred in a remote rural area of Kwango province, where poor road conditions and heavy rains mean it takes nearly 48 hours to reach from Kinshasa.
> While more than half of the cases involve children under 5, a 50-year-old man hospitalised in Lucca, Italy, is suspected to have recovered from the disease after a business trip to Congo, Il Tempo reported.
These statements don't feel very compatible. Either it would mean that the business trip was to a really hard to reach rural area at a insane time for traveling there, or the disease is already widespread in other areas as well.
The discrepancy I find more interesting is that the Italian traveler doesn't seem like the sort of person to be severely malnourished. Assuming it really is the same disease, it's one small indication that the 'trivial infection, abysmal baseline health status' explanation is not adequate.
I don't know what they meant by "have recovered" but if he has recovered, it shouldn't be that bad. But the phrasing is weird: why hospitalize a patient who has recovered? Is it because he was sick on arrival and got better in the hospital? Because of some after-effects? For analysis? For an unrelated reason?
Nah, the businessman was probably in a more urban area, and he likely came into contact with a person (or contaminated item) who had recently been in the extremely rural area of outbreak.
> While more than half of the cases involve children under 5, a 50-year-old man hospitalised in Lucca, Italy, is suspected to have recovered from the disease after a business trip to Congo, Il Tempo reported.
These statements don't feel very compatible. Either it would mean that the business trip was to a really hard to reach rural area at a insane time for traveling there, or the disease is already widespread in other areas as well.